It fucking hurt having to write the above.
0 Boosts
0 Likes
Got a reply, my request has been forwarded to responsible parties. The reply also included an ask to keep an open mind.
For the sake of transparency, this is the reply I'm sending:
> I mainly am replying, though, to say I respect your opinion and to
> ask you to at least keep an open mind regarding what the values are.
Sorry, I have no desire to change my mind. My stance on LLMs is
unshakeable, and it is not a moderate stance[1]. The only way it can
change is going more extreme.
[1]: https://come-from.mad-scientist.club/@algernon/statuses/01KPAF6EKVYS3FY3M2PNDZMH7S
I'll sign any papers regarding the revocation if necessary, and see to
it that it's properly done, but I wish to have nothing to do with the
SFC or anyone involved with aforementioned policy in the future. Sorry.
The crawlers have knocked my sites offline1, keeping things online required considerable financial effort2, even more work to counter the crawler assault3. My work has been stolen and regurgritated. I've had trouble finding work due to my unwillingness to use these "things"4.
There are countless people who can say the same.
The entire "AI" business is evil. What do we do with evil? We fucking fight it, not debate it, not "keep an open mind" about it.
And if you can't reach a consensus in an organization? Then do the next best thing: shut up. Or you end up burning bridges, and burn them hard.
They no longer do, but not for lack of trying. ↩︎
Upscaling my server from time to time was not cheap, for one, and that's only half of it. ↩︎
I'm proud of what I accomplished with iocaine, but I could have spent the time I had to dedicate to it on better things. ↩︎
I'm okay on the work front at the moment, though. ↩︎
Further updates: there's been a couple of more emails exchanged, my request has been acknowledged.
It also turns out that the legal thing here is not a revocation of the agreement, but the SFC assigning copyright back to me, and that'll happen.
4 months later
Four months ago, I asked the SFC to assign copyright back to me for any future Debian contributions I may make. They asked for some time, because people were on leave, and events were coming up, and so on. I said sure. I had - and still don't - have any plans to contribute to Debian anytime soon, so it's not very urgent.
However, four months later, my standing copyright assignment to a pro-LLM entity is in stark contradiction with my stated very much anti-LLM values. While I am in process of exiting tech, I haven't fully done so yet, and this is starting to hurt me, I have to explain it to people, and point them to this thread. It sucks.
So I emailed them again today, asking them to assign my copyright back as soon as possible.
I was assured now that they'll get on it soon. Good. I'll update this thread when there's more news.
Copyright has been assigned back to me.
Now, one of theirs would like a call with me, to hear my perspective (it's not Bradley, I wouldn't even consider talking to him). I'm still torn whether to go on a call.
On one hand, as far as I'm concerned, the SFC's reputation is ruined, and they are irredeemable. But the person asking has been 100% respectful, and I dunno... maybe out of past respect for them, specifically, I might...
But then again: what's the point in talking to a member of an organization that has betrayed my trust?
I'm gonna sleep on this.
Slept on this, talked it through with my Wife, and she asked a decisive question: is there any outcome of talking with them that'd be beneficial, or at least not completely pointless to either party?
On my end, there's nothing for me in it. No matter what the SFC does, even if they fire Bradley, and walk back all the AI bullshit, the damage is done, and I'm never going to trust anyone who had anything to do with these events.
For the same reason, I do not believe it is of use for them in any way, either. The criticism against LLMs have been long known by the time the SFC decided to go the way of the slop, and they still went with it. There's nothing new I can tell them - or if I can, then they didn't do their research, and are irredeemable anyway.
So I'm going to reply that no, I will not be going on a call.
@algernon
what about an outcme in which the person you talk to leaves SFC?
Took a bit for my relayhost to deliver the message, but it eventually did.