Post #3161057

2025-12-07 01:20 UTC

Generative AI isn’t bad because it’s closed source. It isn’t bad because it’s made by bad companies. It’s bad because it was designed to “solve” the ultra wealthy needing other humans that dare work for pennies of that wealth to live. It was designed for bad intentions from the very beginning. There is no good generative AI no matter who tries to tell you otherwise. Yeah, generative AI is likely not going away, but don’t pretend that somehow makes it ok. It spotlights who all is bad. 🧵4/4

Replies (4)

@Em0nM4stodon@infosec.exchange 2025-12-07 01:47

@micahilbery@mstdn.social :1000: :1000: :1000: :1000:

Open ##3161058
@dalias@hachyderm.io 2025-12-07 01:50

@micahilbery@mstdn.social Hot take that shouldn't be: open source software made to do bad things is still bad, not magically good because it's open source. In fact, being open source makes it *worse* because it lowers the barrier to entry doing bad things. See: all the webshit FOSS made for doing dark patterns commerce, adtech/tracking integration with your site, etc.

Open ##3161059
@jan_leila@mspsocial.net 2025-12-07 04:11

@micahilbery@mstdn.social l few thoughts I have on this thread some agreeing some disagreeing: 1. the "it needs to be open sourced" is a facebook line. Open weights is not open source stop letting them tell you it is 2. I feel like a lot of the "but just open source it" comes from people who think having a server in their spare room is a 100% normal thing that most people can do. Its not. Most people cant throw 5k at computing gear and high uptime power and internet.

Open ##3161063
@joshg@mathstodon.xyz 2025-12-07 21:56

@micahilbery@mstdn.social I mean, the initial work was done by researchers and technical artists (yes, artists) who were playing with what was possible. it's the shitty capitalists who decided to use it to replace artists. so, yes, "bad companies", but there aren't really any good companies, and sadly there's probably no going back to the beginning at this point.

Open ##3161066