• baggachipz@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    Ahh, see, but the gun people don’t say it’s solely to kill. They say it’s “a tool”. I guess it could be for hunting, or skeet shooting, or target practice. One could argue that they get more out of owning a gun than just killing people.

    But the result of gun ownership is also death where it wouldn’t have otherwise occurred. Yes, LLMs are a tool, but they also destroy the environment through enormous consumption of energy which is mostly created using non-renewable, polluting sources. Thus, LLM use is killing people, even if that’s not the intent.

    • herrvogel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Difference remains whatever people claim. Guns are weapons made to cause damage first and foremost, and tools second. LLMs are tools first and whatever else second. You can un-dangerousify a tool by using it properly, but you can’t do that with a literal weapon. Danger and damage and harm is their entire reason to exist in the first place.

      • baggachipz@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Good point, but I also think that the intent does not necessarily affect the result. BTW I also think guns shouldn’t be a thing, unless under very strict circumstances (military, licensed hunters). I also posit that the use of unlicensed LLMs in the general public is proving to be irresponsible. That is to say, a specific and worthy use case should be established and licensed to use these “AI” tools.