I hear Sam Metaman is actually a pretty chill dude, compared to his cousins.

The day of reckoning is approaching fast. May this teach a lesson to my fellow techies that tech billionaires aren’t any better than the other billionaires. I hope there won’t be another cryptoscam after LLMs 🤷‍♀️

Or, if there’s another one, I hope that it won’t consume massive amounts of energy. If techbros only hurt themselves, I suppose it’s fine.

Nobody talked about banning them, once again. I don’t want to do that. I want it to leave the mainstream, for environmental reasons first and foremost.

The fuckup is, IDK, the false impression of productivity, and the 41% more bugs? That seems like a huge deal to me, even though I’d like to see this study being reproduced to draw real conclusions.

This, with strawberrries, Air Canada’s chatbots, the 3 Miles Island stuff, the delaying of Google’s carbon neutrality efforts, the cursed Google results telling you to add glue to your pizza, the distrust of the general public about anything with an AI label on it, to mention just a few examples… It’s starting to become a lot.

Even if you omit the ethical aspects of cooking the planet for a toy, the technology is wildly unsound. You seem to think it can get better, and I can respect that. But I’m very skeptical, and there’s a lot of people with the same opinion, even in tech.

I’m talking about people criticizing LLMs. I’m not a politician. But I’ve seen a few debates about LLMs on this platform, enough to know about the common complaints against ShitGPT. I’ve never seen anyone on this platform seriously arguing for a ban. We all know it’s stupid and that it will be ineffective, just like crackdowns on VPNs in authoritarian countries.

The reminder is the tech itself. It’s yet another tech pushed by techbros to save the world that fails to deliver and is costing the rest of the planet dearly in the form of ludicrous energy consumption.

And by activism, I mean stuff happening on Lemmy as well as outside (coworkers, friends, technical people at conferences/meetups). Like it or not, the consensus among techies in my big canadian city is that, while the tech sure is interesting, it’s regarded with a lot of mistrust.

You can take LLMs seriously if you’d like. But the proofs that the tech is unsound for software engineering keep piling up. I’m fine with your skepticism. But I think the future will look bleaker and bleaker as times goes by. Not a week goes by without its lot of AI fuckups being reported in the press. This article is one of many examples.

You can bury your head under the sand all you want. Meanwhile, the arguments proving the tech “flimsy af” will keep piling up.

We can’t do that, nobody’s saying we can. But this is an important reminder that the tech savior bros aren’t very different from the oil execs.

And constant activism might hopefully achieve the goal of pushing the tech out of the mainstream, with its friend crypto, along other things not to be taken seriously anymore like flying cars and the Hyperloop.

If it didn’t significantly contribute to the cooking of all lifeforms on planet Earth, most of us would not mind. We would still deride it because of its untrustworthiness. However, it’s not just useless: it’s also harmful. That’s the core of the beef I (and a lot of other folks) have against the tech.

Have you read the article? It’s a shared experience multiple people report, and the article even provide statistics.

Whether or not I’ve used Copilot is entirely irrelevant to the points I was making. Please remain on topic.

Removed by mod

deleted by creator

Of course you know me better than myself.

I guess you wanted an answer but decided upfront you weren’t gonna like it no matter what? Not much I can do about that.

Carbon footprint. Techbro arrogance. Not sure what’s hard to understand about it.

You’re not even making sense anymore 🤣

I’d also add that, depending on the language, the ways you can shoot yourself in the foot are very subtle (cf C++/C, which are popular languages for “secure” stuff).

It’s already hard to not write buggy code, but I don’t think you will detect them by just reviewing LLM code, because detecting issues during code review is much harder than when you’re writing code.

Oh, and I assume it’ll be tough to get an LLM to follow MISRA conventions.

What if I told you that we can do all these things at once, and don’t have to pick just one. Mindblowing!

Regarding the alternatives to fossil fuels, they still aren’t free as far as emissions go. It’s still better to not need a new source of power if you can, because they require minerals, fossil fuels, etc. to build.

Also, an insane strain on the power grid makes the transition to greener sources of electricity more difficult because there’s a bigger demand to satisfy. That delays the transition.

If you don’t like how “this website” talks about your garbage tech, maybe you can fuck off back to Reddit with the rest of the douchebags who still believe crypto has a future?

Whataboutism at its finest 👌

The difference with other things causing climate change is that some of these other things are actually useful and work, which is not the case with ShitGPT.

And you can be mad at both simultaneously. You don’t have to decry LLMs only.

No, because the carbon footprint is ridiculously high.

Quit the whataboutism. While the construction industry is in dire need of improvements, it’s at least causing GHG emissions to achieve a useful goal, unlike ShitGPT which repeatedly fails to prove its value when opposed to its environmental costs.

On behalf of all humans suffering from your tech bro arrogance: fuck you and your useless tech. I wish this kind of energy consumption becomes illegal, because it is criminal. Can’t wait for the bubble to finally pop.

The article mentions generative AI btw, the kind that powers ShitGPT.