Post #2521253

2026-03-11 19:39 UTC

@balinares@furry.engineer @nicuveo@tech.lgbt This only holds if you believe there can be an end which justifies the means. To entertain it at all, you must think there's a possible outcome that makes the harms excusable. That *is* where people are disappointing me. That once they've done this, I can never take them seriously again that they care about the environment, or worker solidarity, or supporting artists, because they've shown they were just waiting for the right bus to throw those ideals under.

Replies (2)

@LionsPhil@plush.city 2026-03-11 19:44

@balinares@furry.engineer @nicuveo@tech.lgbt And yes I'm getting hypersensitized to this by being in tech. Yes there's obviously leeway here for people looking at the new highly-hyped toy before they've realized the deep rot it's built on. I can understand, but disagree with, using it to demonstrate how bad the output is. All while I'm watching people around me completely sincerely go "wow, this made up better team photos than I could have taken!", let alone anything happening in the codebase or bug tracker.

Open ##2521254
@balinares@furry.engineer 2026-03-11 19:53

@LionsPhil@plush.city @nicuveo@tech.lgbt No, I think there are outcomes where less overall harm has occurred, and I think that will be non-zero pretty much no matter what we do now; and I don't know if blanket refusal is how we get to these least-harm outcomes. Not unless there's a large number joining in, and as implied elsewhere in the thread, I don't see that happening now. Not anymore. It's all so fucked. Pay your union dues, that's probably going to be what makes a difference. What I don't know is if it's worth keeping a job that increasingly involves codegen models as the way to fund those dues. If you do know a path to zero harm that isn't paved with wishes and thin air, then please by all means let me know, because I sure as hell am not seeing it. :/

Open ##2521255