Post #1822803
2026-04-18 18:44 UTC
@ekuber idk, I feel stupider after reading the original thread and don’t particularly want to take it apart. But my brain disagrees with me on that.
> My code is not intended to evoke emotion. It does not change people think about the world.
Yeah, no. Either we are doing “engineering” and thus care about people who use (even as a transient dependency) the “widgets” we build, or we are engaged in something else, likely at the expense of said people. Ironically, the latter will also cause said people to have “emotions” and make them think about the world, but in a less happy way.
I do find it “interesting” that we now have the right way to write code, which is to tell an llm to write it (kinda like think hard and then write it down). And, yay, we are all architects now. Fuck that.
Replies (1)
-
@bms48@mastodon.social 2026-04-19 13:31
@wbftw @ekuber Something something something Ivan Illich's anarchistic theory of knowledge and pedagogy as espoused in Tools for Conviviality. I think the point is: LLMs aren't a "convivial" tool by nature, even when used just to write code; they rob practitioners of their agency, though oneshotting the boilerplate may be fine. Even their use in INFOSEC is questionable vs more traditional deep-learning approaches and static analysis. "I don't think that the real violence has even started yet."