Whoa that was pretty eye-opening, thanks for sharing. I’ve been frustrated by the seemingly widespread blind trust of these systems, this really helps explain why they should not be trusted.

It’s a pretty strong indictment that the system can express the fact that it shouldn’t be trusted, but can’t do anything about it, even in the same session, but especially across sessions. Until and unless the devs figure out a way to be transparent and fix these massive problems, I’m still staying far away from LLMs.

I’m no dev, so I can’t speak to the codebase or mod tools, but I honestly don’t think it’s going to get much better than this right now. Lemmy has its issues for sure, but the community has been surprisingly stable, with little growth spurts here and there, and more healthy engagement than I expected. I get frustrated every so often, and there are accounts that make me want to scream, but that’s normal in any place where strangers interact.

I’m curious what other folks have to say, because if there’s a better alternative that I haven’t heard of, then I’m all in, but it’s been pretty hard to keep Lemmy as active as it is. It sounds like you might be a dev? If so, would you be willing to build the tools you want to see for the services you mentioned? It’d be awesome if folks with skills worked to improve existing open source stuff like Lemmy rather than building whole new ones that don’t have any active communities.

Voyager has this, it’s a super useful feature.

Hard agree. It’s the only kind of death penalty I could get behind.

Thank you for the thoughtful answer. This is so frustrating, and is very similar to other situations where megacorps decide that paying fines is cheaper than following the law.

Another terrible byproduct of all this is the false incentive structure it sets up. Rather than investing in people who are capable of producing unique and creative products, it incentivizes people to make more quantity of shitty content rather than high quality stuff, and that will ultimately make the eventual consumer product that’s based on shitty stolen work, well, shitty.

Here’s what I don’t understand: these are the wealthiest corporations in the world. They literally have trillions of dollars at their disposal. Since they clearly believed there was value in the videos they stole, why could they not just ask the creators’ permission, and if they consent, pay them a fair fee for access? If they don’t consent, why not just hire a creative to make some more content for them to use? I mean, Apple owns a massive production studio for fucks sake. Tim Cook farts money, I don’t think a thousand dollar investment in a real person is going to break the bank. They could even order up a whole new show just to train the model.

Instead, they piss off creatives by stealing their work. Just use your money for once. Invest in content. Everybody would be happier, they’d garner some trust, and nobody’s livelihood would be harmed.

But no, instead they choose the most devious, underhanded, selfishly shitty way to conduct their business. Fuck these evilcorps.

We need skeptics to push back against these insanely wealthy business people who think that we’ll just take their word for things that that they then actively undermine in favor of profits and products that will not benefit society or make up for the intellectual theft that was required to build them. Ignoring or pretending these issues don’t exist does not make them go away.

Giving blind faith and loyalty to a company that does not care about you is how we get nefarious and self-centered powerhouses like google and facebook. Companies that large, that can influence the entire world on a whim, should not exist. If more people had listened to those of us sounding the alarms about these companies years ago, we might have saved ourselves a lot of grief.

I’d just ask that you take a step back, think about the motivations of the people you hold in such high regard, and allow skeptics the space to keep conversations like this going, before it’s too late.

It’s takes real skill to take a concept that has been developed over years of highly technical debate and scholarship and make it understandable with normal language, even if the underlying concepts are actually super simple.

I think a reason for this is that in highly technical or complex fields, it’s counterintuitively easier to speak in full jargon, since that’s how ideas are developed and how people in the field are convinced of their validity. Using language for the “public” can often mean you lose some of the more subtle meanings, though you’re right that at the end of the day the explanations that we end up with are usually easy for most people to understand.

So I think it’s actually pretty natural to start with jargon and then refine the ideas by translating them into normal speak.