After I made this unrelated post, I was informed by @MysticMushroom1776@lemmy.dbzer0.com that lemmy.dbzer0.com was a pro-genAI instance.
It was honestly shocking for me to hear that these two things can coexist and I would like to share the discussion which was correctly moved for being off topic from the above linked post.
I think we owe it to ourselves to discuss topics like this with an open mind.
Here is my statements in reply to MysticMushroom1776, I wasn't able to record their reply before it was removed for being off topic bit I hope they can come here and we can continue the discussion.
Others, please also feel free to discuss with us.
'Wow, I didn't know [that lemmy.dbzer0.com was a pro genAI instance] As an anarchist myself I have to say that is really disappointing.
Anarchist communities [especially in real life] need humans otherwise there is no community. GenAl is a stolen facsimile of a human who can never understand morals or praxis. It can never understand freedom or control. It will however poison our communities (look at what SpaceX/Anthropic is doing in Memphis, TN) make us more predictable (and thus easier to control) and isolate us from other humans within the community which is so important to us.
Even with the most moral genAl you can possibly have, one that is totally FOSS and self hosted on a single gaming GPU, a lot of this is still true.
~~Obviously, this is the wrong place but I have to ask,~~ [prior to moving the discussion to this thread] what makes you think the extreme negatives of genAl (specifically to the anarchist community) can be excused?
... [I do not have a copy of mushroom's reply]
I pirate and seed. I'm also a fan of the megathread And for the most part, I think data is data. However there is a big difference between my pirating a book like the Lord of the Rings (which is credited and I can see the title of) and how Meta scraped Anna's archive and funneled all that data into an approximation of all combined work.
If I pirate the book, the Lord of the Rings to read it. I might enjoy it, I might talk about it to others, quote it, share it with my daughter, I might use the ring of power an an allegory for authoritarian control with a powerful technology, I might even decide to buy my own copies of the book.
What Meta did and then released as open source, won't allow a person the freedom to do any of that. The works were consumed and are used in silence to camouflage as human thought. No credit will ever be contributed. And so no one can even hope to appreciate the original works that was used in training.
The other concerns I have with (local) genAI that I think are deeply important to anarchists specifically.
- Isolation of humanity
- severing of our ties to community
- increasing predictability
- method of control
Photo is genAI made and sourced from the following article:
Its software.
Corporations.
Corporation
... By a corporation.
What this all boils down to as a problem is pretty simple - its capitalism.
Do you have the same seething hatred for computer vision?
What about microphones? Are they the root of all evil? Flock uses them in their cameras, so they should draw the same ire, right?
What about drones? Is their existence the harbinger of doom because they can be used for bombing?
Is the technology to blame? Or the people behind it?
I can't comprehend blaming software (or even hardware) for the problems created by people. AI isn't building pollution generating data centers. AI isn't behind stock market manipulation and rapidly rising hardware prices. AI isn't trying to do anything. It doesn't have intelligence or feelings or anything of the sort.
Its just software. Blame the people causing the problems instead. If it wasn't AI it would just be something else.
Right, but Meta's foundational llm is what most "open" LLMs are based on.
If you are running an open model today, you are most likely using this data set.
And it's not that they used annas or pirated media, I don't care about copyright, I use annas all the time. This thing that I think is important is that the wroks were used in such a way that you can not cite it, you can not attribute where an idea came from. I do know there is some interesting research in this area but at the moment we can't ask an llm when if is using the ideas of others or where exactly those ideas came from.
You can be iterating on top of something an llm wrote not realizing that the book you are writing is just some summary of something else.
You can ignore that, but it should atleast be recognized.
I don't actually have a "seething hatred" for genAI. I just think it is the antithesis of what I am trying to accomplish, wich is freedom.
Atleast, I think that is true for the current iteration of genAI. I'm open to change however.
I don't think thats true, I think qwen (alibaba) or mistral would take that seat. Not that I think alibaba is some paragon of openness or something, just that I don't think its Meta.
Again though, that has nothing to do with the technology itself.
ChatGPT popularized the assistant model, does that mean any assistant ever would somehow be tainted by the existence of chatgpt? Even for something built ground-up?
That seems to me like blaming technology for the problems of corporations.
Thats the problem I have with the "hard anti-ai" folks. The blame is in the wrong spot. AI is just the current vehicle for what I can only consider malice to the general population, not the cause.
Be anti-datacenter. Protest against construction, speak out at town meetings, take direct action - all valid, appropriate, and fully has my support. We don't have anything close to anarchism right now, and as ive said in other places many times before - take all avenues (mentioned in the context of voting and similar things, but its a universal thought).
To me that is in no way "fighting AI". Its fighting against the corporation-sponsored destruction of our communities, local habitats, and the environment.
I just think the blame should be in the right place - capitalism.
Where that only gets complex is where a single response is formed from 5 or 7 or 20 different sources.
That said, its important to point out that not all llm's are about generating text, images, or video. I think that also gets lost on a lot of folks.
Definitely a lot of capitalist fuckery, can't argue there.
I could agree with this, except for the obvious logical fallacy.
This can be used to justify the development of any and all technology. Including machines purpose built for nothing other than exterminating all life on this planet.
Why? Cause someone has to activate it. Be that a corporation or other person.
You do lightly address that here
And yet, ai couldn't exist without pollution generating data centers.
The reverse of this is also true. You cannot hammer a nail without a hammer.
The best way to describe ai here is handing someone a hammer, but the only thing they can hammer with it, is your own face.
Because it's a tool to influence us more than anything else, it's baked into the design, through ai sycophancy. The old adage "if the product is free, you're the product" is true here. Why give out ai for free for so long?
It is a mass influence tool.
Back to the original point, is a drone, a harbinger of doom? No. But ai isn't the equivalent if a drone. It's a drone carrying a nuke. which is only pointed at us, and we can't point it elsewhere by design.
So yeah, I think that's a problem
We already have. And that same technology can be used for energy.
Again, its what its used for.
AI has existed since the 50s, but I'll assume you're talking about LLMs.
But that is also a no. You can build with pytorch, completely from scratch.
Thats an absolutely terrible and nonsensical analogy. Sorry, but there is literally no truth in it. I can only assume, based on this comment and the previous I replied to, that you are fundamentally misinformed about LLMs and how they work.
.... Nope. Thats the corporations behind the big models. Again, you're blaming software for how someone is using it.
Again, no.
The whisper model is an LLM. Its compact, and has a very specific purpose - to identify spoken audio, take spoken audio and transcribe, and translate spoken audio.
It doesn't do anything else. It is an LLM.
In what way could you possibly misconstrue its purpose that it was designed for "ai sycophancy"? What are you even talking about here?
This is use, not the technology itself.
This is what I can only describe as a hallucination. This is entirely a fabrication in your head about what an LLM is.
I do think the transcription that the whisper models can do is impressive.
If you needed to understand what someone is saying, and weren't able to ask them then I agree it makes sense to use.
I think it is a more interesting question when we add a translation into the mix from a different language. Sure, there might be times when you need to understand what's being said in a different language immediately. But if you do have the time and ability to find someone that can translate, or even learn the language yourself. Then that seems like a much better method of building trust, solidarity, and understanding between actual people.
I speak a little bit of a good number of languages. The few that I'm pretty good at, I can still have trouble discerning especially with some dialects. So personally I find translation helpful still, despite having learned the language.
That said, its one of the few I use that are made by others, usually to transcribe something I recorded on the go. I work from home 95% of the time though, so its pretty rare.
You fundamentally misunderstand my point.
You cannot hammer without a hammer, it influences because it exists. Not because of anything a hammer does, simply because it is.
LLMs exist to parse through large datasets, therefore we create large data sets! Like population-level vaccine acceptance, public health behaviors, and evaluating the spread of misinformation about vaccines! (PS: Yes, LLMs play a significant role in healthcare in a good way)
Oh, the horror!
No, I think your point is flawed at a fundamental level. The person who chooses to hammer in a screw rather than use a screwdriver wasn't unduly influenced by the existence of the hammer, or by a lack of awareness of the existence of a screwdriver.
You cannot choose what you have no knowledge of. So in that aspect at least, you are very wrong.
Sure thing.
I'll live over here in reality where someone having access to a screw is also going to include (in such overwhelming certainty that the negative can only be described as an exception existing in theoretical consideration only) the knowledge of the existence of a screwdriver.
I'll also note you have zero comment on any of my corrections of your misunderstandings about LLMs, so I'll go ahead and move on now.
It's because like the majority of anti-AI people, the "misunderstanding" is largely intentional. To get you to debate them. Hoping they can "win" and when they can't win through their arguments because it's all bullshit they just knock over the chess pieces and declare victory. Which is what this liberal chud is doing right now.
No corrections were necessary as you misunderstood my original point.
But to correct you anyway. Influence on llm models comes not just from instructions prior to entering text (pre prompting). But also from the inclusion, or selective exclusion of training data.
As a person cannot choose what they do not know about, so a LLM cannot respond about what it has not been trained on.
As such influnece exists in both models regardless.
These biases and their ability to influence a person. Due to the inherent sycophancy of ai and the tendency to anthropomorphise which humans have contribute to the phenomenon known as ai psychosis.
Thesetwo factors combine to the "gun pointed at your head that is inherent to LLMs".
Ai also hasn't existed since the 50s. It was theorised, although intelligent machines have existed long before that. An example was the mechanical turk, which was ironically powered by a human.
Anyway. I'm afraid you're wrong on me not being educated on how they work. I know all too much about how they work. I also know how people work, though that always seems to be a blind spot to ai enthusiasts.
Still comes down to those training.
Again, you seem intent on blaming technology for how people use it.
Are you trying to blame a model for how someone trained it? Or the user for using a model without knowing what it does?
How, in the wide wide world of sports, is this the fault of the technology?
I'm afraid its all the more clear that you do not.
Which isn't you. Hence the influence.
But your contention seems to be, I have no problem with the technoclogy merely because it was designed to kill me. That was the intent of the person making instead of the technology itself.
That's rather myopic.
Also, you didn't point out an intance where I "didn't understand" how ai works.
You are sorely mistaken on that point. The models I would say are 'in use' for me are models I've built.
Extremely specific and tailored to their purpose, built from scratch.
I would recommend reading my comments again then. I pointed out quite a few of your misunderstandings.
At this point though, I feel like I'm just repeating myself here. So I'll be clear.
You clearly do not understand the requirements to run an LLM. You clearly do not have any understanding on their history or development.
And most importantly, you are clearly blaming technology rather than the corporations behind the misuse.
Enjoy your day.
Do you host your models anywhere, or have documentation on the methods you used?
They aren't really general purpose, so no.
Though I'm working on a new classification model that may be good for more general use, so maybe that one I will.
As far as the methods, these are readily available - Build A Large Language Model From Scratch covers it pretty well. There's another for a reasoning model from scratch, but its more reasoning from scratch and starts with a base model.
This one?
Build a Large Language Model (From Scratch)
Ahaha. Sure, you selected vetted the model, adjusted weights and also have the computing power to train the model I doubt that.
No, these are custom models for hyper specific purposes. Built, not trained.
Doubt all you want, I could go that route on just my laptop if I wanted.
For the record, the biggest model I made is less than 2GB, and easily runs on the embedded hardware it runs on.
Also, no, nothing like flock or any of that. Ive turned those types of projects down.
The hammer exists. There are nails to be hammered. Will you destroy your hammer because some asshole also has one?
I don't know if you quite realize how you sound. Chuds exist. Chuds with guns are a problem. This does not mean "we should ban guns" as chuds don't care about bans. Your ban will disarm an honest, marginalized person to be an easier chud target.
Replace guns with AI:
I don't know if you quite realize how you sound. Chuds exist. Chuds with ai are a problem. This does not mean "we should ban ai" as chuds don't care about bans. Your ban will disarm an honest, marginalized person to be an easier chud target.
I stand by both paragraphs.
I'm actually a supporter of gun control.
Well now, if chuds are the problem, why not ban them? That probably involves prison or some really stringent background checks.
But I'm sure you wouldn't be in favor of those either.
The simplest way is to ban guns and, put massive penalties on breaking those rules.
Honestl, y as far as ai goes. I'm don't think there is any ethical LLM usage.
You'll get your gun control when the chuds are mad because the trans girls are armed too. Its how this always works in your spineless liberal government. Gun Control in California really amped up from panic about the Black Panthers. It helped get Reagan into Office, after all.
Which I'm sure is totally okay by you, and you have no need to deconstruct. 😅
Do you use spellcheck? Do you use speech to text? Congrats, you're using an LLM, without knowing-consent. Any of your newsfeeds including most social media (except here and a few other holdouts)...
I don't envy you. The spaces you know and love are being fed to this... Piece of garbage tech that requires DEEP literacy to touch safely. And there's nothing any of us can do about it, because capitalism says "stonk holders" are who matters, not stake holders.
And you have nothing to come back with except, "them's the brakes." Your government will let you march in a circle where nobody has to see you or hear you if they don't want. And you'll still be logged by every Flock Camera along the way, flagged in a Palantir database as a potential "problem", and soon, that can integrate with how your Facebook feed changes!
I would rather die than live there with you. Fortunately, I have another option. I'm mad I can't bring you with me, but that wasn't up to me. It was up to you.
Ima be over here generating ai-tracking-adversarial images for t-shirts, breaking applicant tracking systems with optimization, and poisoning deviantart images so the artist can post THAT and the image hurts any model trained on them.
When you're ready to respect how cyberpunk dystopian we already are instead of pretending you can vote it away, you can join us in the good fight.