far too many people try to defend the technology as if the issues with “gen” AI aren’t inherent to LLMs as a whole. it’s tiring.
You must log in or register to comment.
I would appreciate an explanation why it is fascistic in particular. Is it about today’s AI companies? Is there something inherently fascistic in large scale algorithms that try to imitate humans? Valuing aesthetics of knowing the truth over the process of learning? I see the correlation, not as much the connection
I would say yes, yes, and yes. Mainly I’m trying to say that even if the environmental and societal factors were solved, LLMs would still be pretty fundamentally fucked, as I also said in another comment in thus thread.
I thought about this a while ago and while its more subjective and personal, I hope it helps illustrate what I’m getting at. If someone subconsciously, or even intentionally, put a piece of a song or words or whatever that I wrote into their own work, I’d feel downright honoured. I’d appreciate some credit if possible (I already think lack of attribution is an issue among creatives sometimes), but even if not, I’m happy knowing my art had enough of an effect on someone to weasel it’s way into their own! That’s amazing! On the other hand, if a piece of something I made similarly wound up in someone’s own “creation” because of an LLM, I’d feel empty, as it means nothing. Less than nothing, in fact. I’d be really upset by it.
I hope that helps?
the OC asked why its fascistic and you answered essentially with “when it outputs something trained on my data, it feels bad, thus fascistic”.
Maybe I’m missing something, but not liking something doesn’t make is fascist.
EDIT: I guess imma add this: fascism is bad. but bad doesn’t necessarily mean it’s fascist.
I can see where this guy is coming from, after all, the collection and conglomeration of everybody’s information is very fascist-esque, but reading their second comment I’m not even sure if that’s what they mean
They’re honestly kind of just rambling about it not feeling good to be plagiarised from, which comes across as a little odd
I was trying not to repeat what I already said in my other big response in this thread, so I just added another, more subjective point. Sorry, OC.
However, while its mostly my own perspective, I think its still based in the same argument: taking inspiration from someone through appreciation of their work is (usually) honouring it. If nothing else, it shows that person’s art impacted another’s. An LLM, though, does nothing more then shamelessly regurgitate bits and pieces of that and other works in an aimless fashion. There is no rhyme or reason or thread of inspiration to retrace.
Theres a reason fascists hate creativity, colourfulness, and differences between people: it goes against everything fascism stands for. LLMs were made with the intent to homogenize and steal from creatives, all while passing off output as at least somewhat original. I wouldn’t call Canada fascist, even though we do many fascistic things, like any country under capitalism. Not being strictly fascist doesn’t make those actions or laws any less so, however, and an LLM made by a non-fascist doesn’t make the concept of am LLM any less fascistic.
I don’t think you know what the word fascist means.
AI art is bad, therefore fascism?
When I first saw the post I wondered if that was a carefully defined stance or a linguistic shortcut, and its fine both ways, really, but I was a philosophy student, this is my thing
“inherent” is a strong word, and perhaps fascistic tendencies (not convinced as to whether the whole thing is fascistic yet) are an inherent aspect to the kind of llm we are aware of. There’s a but: would it be impossible to create an opt-in LLM database? It wouldn’t happen in the world we currently know, but if we talk about inherent characteristics, that’s the exact thing we need to talk about (you don’t have to care about this at all, there’s no law about what words mean what, but it makes it easier to share ideas without confusion. And judging by the comments, there has been confusion). Do I think we could benefit from an LLM? While I hate chatbots with a passion, they dont have to be chatbots. Deep.ly is a translation only LLM, I used that back in 2018-2019 because that was the very best automated translator available for free and I had pages of technical stuff to translate (maybe they changed since then, idk). Translation can be both utilitarian and artistic, I certainly wouldn’t want a robot to translate poems, but even if, would that be fascistic?
Maybe the joke went over my head, but could someone explain how they are fascist?
I get that they are kind of a disaster for the environment and people’s brains right now, but fascism seems unrelated
All of the LLMs are built by fascists. Elon is the most obvious, where he retrains it every time Grok contradicts him or his fascist beliefs
Does that include non-US LLMs like Mistral? Not that I have a high opinion of even those kinds of LLMs, but I’m not sure whether “fascistic” really captures the inherent issues of LLMs, vs. the inherent issues of US tech giants.
My best guess is that the argument is “the scale of data needed to train an LLM can never be obtained in a manner that isn’t oppressive or stealing by it’s scale” and thats not really true. there are a lot of open works, works which allow using them in datasets, etc. there are ways to get permission from people, give attribution, and just be honest about everything. the reason its not happening is because we live in a hell of a world with oppressive systems that benefit from hiding and manipulation
there’s no reason it cant be better in a better world
if the argument is generating things like drawings, renders, writing, music, videos, are inherently bad than that’s not really saying all LLMs are bad
accessibility LLMs should be a part of a better world at least. what changed my perspective is seeing someone irl who didnt speak english and just voice messaged chatgpt in their language and it translated that to me in english. was it perfect? i doubt that. do i support chatgpt? fuck no. do i believe something like this can be done properly and for public good? yes
Translators existed before LLMs.
Modern translators are LLMs. Have been since before 2021.
Models themselves, when not told to be any different, are usually left leaning and quite empathetic.
came here to mention exactly that. and how elon has had a really hard time getting grok to not be left and against him.
I honestly just dont see it. It does have the tendency to concentrate power to the wealthy top (just like factories do) which is fashy but that isnt an inherent property of LLMs. I read your other comment and I just dont get it.
Definitely under a capitalistic economy (and ALL of the world is capitalistic right now, including China). Though if needs were met for all, and benefits shared by all, I’d say even LLMs have a place in UI/UX development, and certain parts of art, even.
It’s not bad to have certain interfaces and interactive elements have a bit more human in there. Though it is VERY bad for these corporations to crash the tech economy by skyrocketing component prices and firing people that can do a FAR better job than the slop machines…
skeletor invented serving cunt
Wouldn’t he serve bone instead? ;3
They already broke the Hippocratic oath, so, “AI” is indefensible.
How long until we start calling programming languages fash as well? LLMs are a tool and is no more fascist than the MP-40 used by Nazi Germany. LLMs don’t hold ideals much like a sub-machine gun doesn’t. Now are LLMs used by fascist? Yes obviously, but saying that fascism is inherit to a tool is just wrong. It can be used for fascist purposes, but it depends on the person using it.
Slippery slope fallacy. Some tools are inherently wrong to use. Since we’re talking about weapons of war, you could never make this argument about napalm, for instance. The flaws of LLMs are inherent to them and can’t be painted over, no matter how perfect the paint or how well intentioned the painter.
I don’t think napalm itself is fascist but it can be used in a fascist way.
If we want to apply the fascist argument here as well, yes, I think napalm could only benefit a cause that, if nothing else, lends itself to fascism. However, putting that aside, there’s no good use case for napalm in general. I can’t believe I keep trying to re-word and explain that tools made for/inherently tied to suppressing or devaluing people and art are fascist, and it goes nowhere.
I would argue LLMs can be more fascist than than a gun. Any gun is used the same way with the same end goal of firing a projectile, but the use and design of a LLM is a lot more varied from model to model. If you purposefully omit or edit training data to change a LLMs response I would say that’s more fascist than making a special gun that shoots a different caliber.
For clarification who are you saying “uses” the LLM, the end user or the people designing it? I’m assuming the end user is who “uses” it
I agree with your main point and this is just kinda a useless argument but what’s the Internet made for if not silly debates? :>
