self

fair enough!

but I don’t actually enjoy arguing and don’t have the skills for formalized “debate” anyway.

it’s ok, nobody does. that’s why we ban it unless it’s amusing (which effectively bans debate for everyone unless they know their audience well enough to not fuck up) — shitty debatelords take up a lot of thread space and mental energy and give essentially nothing back.

wherever “here” is

SneerClub is a fairly old community if you count in its Reddit origins; part of what we do here is sneering at technofascists and other adherents to the TESCREAL belief package, though SneerClub itself tends to focus on the LessWrong Rationalists. that’s the context we tend to apply to articles like the OP.

There is a certain irony to everyone involved in this argument, if it can be called that.

don’t do this debatefan here crap here, thanks

This, and similar writing I’ve seen, seems to make a fundamental mistake in treating time like only the next few, decades maybe, exist, that any objective that takes longer than that is impossible and not even worth trying, and that any problem that emerges after a longer period of time may be ignored.

this isn’t the article you’re thinking of. this article is about Silicon Valley technofascists making promises rooted in Golden Age science fiction as a manipulation tactic. at no point does the article state that, uh, long-term objectives aren’t worth trying because they’d take a long time??? and you had to ignore a lot of the text of the article, including a brief exploration of the techno-optimists and their fascist ties (and contrasting cases where futurism specifically isn’t fascist-adjacent), to come to the wrong conclusion about what the article’s about.

unless you think the debunked physics and unrealistic crap in Golden Age science fiction will come true if only we wish long and hard enough in which case, aw, precious, this article is about you!

it’s appropriate that you think your brain works like an LLM, because you regurgitated this shitty opinion from somewhere else without giving it any thought at all

it can’t be that stupid, you must be using yesterday’s model

nobody asked you to come in here and advertise for perplexity, but you couldn’t fucking help yourself could you

you seem really fucking annoying

imagine discussing a topic

if you’re considering pasting the output of an LLM into this thread in order to fail to make a point: reconsider

we didn’t ask for LLM slop, thx

under no circumstances is “my favorite stochastic parrot got it right / I reran the prompt and it worked this time hmmmm wonder why” an interesting post

I knew you were a lying promptfondler the instant you came into the thread, but I didn’t expect you to start acting like a gymbro trying to justify their black market steroid habit. new type of AI booster unlocked!

now fuck off

can we agree that 90% of the problem with cigarettes are capitalism and not the actual smoking?

after all, the genie is out of the bottle. you can’t destroy them, there are tobacco plants grown at home. even if you ban them, you’ll still have people hand-rolling cigarettes.

it’s fucking weird how I only hear about open source LLMs when someone tries to make this exact point. I’d say it’s because the open source LLMs fucking suck, but that’d imply that the commercial ones don’t. none of this horseshit has a use case.