Post #188561

2026-01-30 19:32 UTC

I point out that this same corporate culture which wants the users of #LLMs (at all levels, from corporate management to end-user consumer usage) NOT to think about how fundamentally untrustworthy "generative #AI" is—the same corporations who wish to blur the lines between truth and falsehood, and persuade people to accept all corporate doings as automatically trustworthy and authoritative—also has zero interest in giving the public truthful information about #globalwarming and the carbon cycle and everything else. In short, I think it's getting pretty close to *ridiculous* to entrust one's monitoring of atmospheric carbon dioxide, or any other important fact about the world, to the products of corporations—not without some independent means of verification and standardization.

Replies (1)

@alyx_woodward@universeodon.com 2026-01-30 19:36

@adafruit@fosstodon.org buys some toy from a catalogue—a transducer for carbon dioxide, say. Do they actually know how it works? Could they verify that it's actually working properly? The toy comes with a datasheet specifying the electrical characteristics of the transducer (the gas-sensitive potentiometric electrode, or whatever it is) and it all seems nice and trustworthy, but why should it be? Why *would* it be? What feedback mechanism is in play in order to insure that the corporate products are actually doing what they say they're doing? Corporate regulation is basically meaningless these days, and corporate bosses are constantly conniving with fascist politicians to make sure that they're able to do whatever they please without ever suffering real-world consequences for it. How can a mere assemblage of bits of corporate #technology possibly be trustworthy these days?

Open ##188600