bkuhn blocked me simply for asking who is harassing him for using proprietary software (I guess he means his new Claude habit). this is sad and disappointing.
0 Boosts
0 Likes
This federated comment is not yet available here.
@mirabilos @jeremiah_ @dalias that is also disappointing!
This federated comment is not yet available here.
@jeremiah_ @dalias @mirabilos do you have evidence of the DMs?
in fact the only person I have ever criticized for using proprietary software is Jim Zemlin, CEO of the Linux Foundation.
to me, software freedom very much includes the freedom to run proprietary software, and I wouldn't have it any other way. it's your computer, run whatever you want on it for all I care.
but, I criticized Zemlin because he used to give keynotes at LF events decrying that this year will be "the year of the Linux desktop" while presenting from his Mac. why I would criticize *that* should be obvious.
(in case it wasn't obvious, my problem with Zemlin doing this was -- if you truly have conviction that the Linux desktop experience is suitable for the masses, why are you using a Mac?)
for the record: i have, previously, criticized bkuhn for using Claude to help formulate his positions on LLM technology. i believe this to be a valid criticism, because the Anthropic models are going to be biased towards recommending the usage of Anthropic's models.
(i mean, come on, this is obvious really.)
but really, any LLM model is going to be biased in favor of recommending LLM model usage. it's not just the proprietary ones.
the point is that we should be, at the very least, careful in how we use and approach these tools.
@ariadne In a book $WIFE was correcting, the "authors" used chatgpt to generate some dialog, which she ended up rewriting entirely, because it was just full of shit, no two sentences formed a logical connection. Despite all this crap, the paragraph about why "ai" was good for education was *by far* the most consistent and well developed. So YES these machines have gigantic biases towards themselves. as expected, but that was still impressive to see.
@ariadne >we should be careful
Sounds like luddism to me. Go live in the woods (which is illegal in most of the world) if you hate technology so much!
Sounds like luddism to me. Go live in the woods (which is illegal in most of the world) if you hate technology so much!
@ariadne I don’t think Bradley will be persuaded by any Claide bias, he’s rather passionate about Free Software.
@jeremiah_ @ariadne Um, he already has been.
@dalias @jeremiah_ yes, I think it is one thing to be curious about new technology and experiment, but my understanding -- based on his own posts -- is that he has started using Claude heavily. this is, of course, his right to do, but I think that the commons becomes useless if everything is AI slop code.
@ariadne @jeremiah_ His vision of Free Software and the actual freedoms that matter has been completely displaced by a fantasy that "AI" will destroy copyright and deliver us the right to copy and reuse any and all proprietary code. Which is now even more utterly worthless than it was before, because it's incomprehensible AI slop that we would never want to incorporate into our programs, and it's imposing requirements to be compatible with that garbage. 🤬
@dalias @ariadne I imagine Bradley as more nuanced with regard to copyright. Personally I think copyright will be weakened significantly by court rulings that will likely determine LLM training as fair use. I do see an opportunity to replace proprietary software, not reuse the proprietary code. It's a huge opportunity if Free Software gets access to the underlying APIs.
@jeremiah_ @ariadne If that happens, it will be imbalanced (freedom for them not for us) and will not be worldwide. The world doesn't listen to US courts anymore. So we'll be back to the dark ages of software that's supposedly free but actually not depending on the jurisdictions you want to use and share it in.
I have no idea what you mean by "gets access to APIs". If you mean web-based RPC sense of "API" like most people nowadays mean, that has nothing to do with copyright but ToS. It's already trivial to figure them out and use them. If you mean a more traditional sense of linkage to library code, no, we do not want to be linking proprietary library code to our free software.
@jeremiah_ @ariadne Slop code has nothing to do with "getting access" to that.
@ariadne 'cause Linux still won't run Logic Pro.
That's the only reason I'll be sad to move off Mac when my current employment ends...
@ariadne i suppose that if you're lost in the sauce you get _completely_ lost in it
@pikhq I think it really sucks that this has become "the" wedge issue
@pikhq @whitequark from a resistance standpoint: yes, I would agree.
but at the same time, this is destroying the community I grew up in and I am sad about it
