Post #4748179 · Elektrine

2026-09-18 11:19 UTC

My main technological requirement is optionality. An API can change its price, behavior, terms, or availability. A local model brings its own costs: hardware, operations, updates, and dependence on upstream model releases. Absolute independence is an illusion, but avoidable lock-in is still a choice. I can only advise people and organizations to test their real use cases against local models. Not a generic benchmark, but their documents, workflows, quality thresholds, latency, privacy needs, and failure modes. Keep data and evaluations portable. Know where a frontier service genuinely earns its premium. Know which critical functions still work if that service disappears. An exit plan is terribly boring, right up to the day it becomes horribly contemporary. 18/34

Replies (1)

@masek@infosec.exchange 2026-09-18 11:19

The application layer begins with a boundary: I reject AI as a compulsory ritual. An employee should not be forced to use AI irrespective of whether it helps the task. A patient should not lose access to a doctor because an AI system has become the only way to obtain an appointment. AI may be an option, an assistant, or even the best default in a defined setting. In essential services especially, there must still be an accessible human alternative, a path to appeal, and a person or institution that remains accountable. Nothing makes me doubt the usefulness of a tool like making it mandatory. Adoption figures produced by coercion tell us little. A technology meant to serve people must leave them meaningful agency. 19/34

Open ##4748177