Many people simply are not ready to be corrected about their preconceived notions about genAI. I learned that the hard way, when the stakes were lower. I meant my replies as an "is", not an "ought".
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
I don’t think people are arguing against general AI.
You have people who don’t work in the space just dogpiling a random librarian because they are mad about Russian Twitter bots, and diffusion models. His only mistake was apologizing.
You're kinda implying an ought - i.e. that it's the responsibility of open source AI people to engage with a really toxic crowd like that.
I'm just using the toxic comment 'likes' as a mute honeypot bc in a couple of years they'll grow out of this phase as AI tools become extremely valuable to them
If that was how I came across, I apologize, that wasn't my intention. Of course you don't have to engage with the ghouls. I'm just trying to provide some context, because at the moment, it's inevitable. I want as many people on our side as will come.
But right now what we need is detailed, nuanced advocacy, that takes into consideration the breadth of the criticism and can aptly take it apart where needed and incur change within the scene where warranted. The pieces just don't fit the way things are.
Comments
I don’t think people are arguing against general AI.
You have people who don’t work in the space just dogpiling a random librarian because they are mad about Russian Twitter bots, and diffusion models. His only mistake was apologizing.
I'm just using the toxic comment 'likes' as a mute honeypot bc in a couple of years they'll grow out of this phase as AI tools become extremely valuable to them
People will fight you on one thing, but really they are shadow boxing a different concept or issue.
Science is inert, and we aren’t working on nuclear weapons.
People need to chill 😎