Post #1637351

2026-03-10 22:55 UTC

@Gargron LLMs are not exclusively a product of large corporations or just marketing. Much of the research and development also takes place in open source and academic communities. The codes for these LLMs are public and can be audited or run locally. Furthermore, I argue that serious ethical reflection is necessary, but prohibition is not the way forward.

Replies (3)

@Papaexmatrikulatus@mastodon.social 2026-03-10 23:36

@df Consciously not using something ≠ prohibition Edit: Also, who cares who worked/ envisioned or works on this now? If you think about LLMs enough, you will likely see enough good arguments about the resource waste, centralization of power and multiplication of slop which describe LLMs. We lived without it before and we can live without it in future times.

Open ##1637352
@joshuagrochow@mathstodon.xyz 2026-03-11 02:28

@df @Gargron Academics may study LLMs out in the open, but I don't think academia has been able to produce LLMs whose outputs are sufficiently marketable compared to the current commercially available ones. Because the first "L" ("large") is - in our current, limited understanding - crucial for the verisimilitude of the synthetic text, and only corporations (and governments, but they mostly haven't gotten to this yet) have the scale to get large enough for that so far.

Open ##1637355
@resuna@ohai.social 2026-03-14 17:46

@df @Gargron The code for the LLM interpreter is relatively simple, and bears the same relationship to the actual LLM as the C compiler does to an operating system. The models are the real software and the ones big and complex enough to be useful are the product of large corporations and mass copyright violation.

Open ##1637357