No, opposing LLMs isn't "purity culture."

[xgranade@wandering.shop]

No, opposing LLMs isn't "purity culture." I've seen this now from quite a few different people, and I disagree vehemently. It is good, actually, to have moral principles and hold to them, even when people with more money than you find said principles annoying.

[theorangetheme@en.osm.town]

@xgranade "You don't want to use the lie machine powered by mulching puppies? What are you, some kind of purist?"

[theorangetheme@en.osm.town]

@xgranade "The guy who invented transistors had a puppy mulcher. Do you hate all computers then?"

[mimesatwork@wandering.shop]

@xgranade It's like someone kept punching you in the face and when you object they claim it's purity culture that you don't want to be punched in the face.

Words mean things. Wanting to not be made accomplice to useless evil for no good reason is not "purity culture"

[xgranade@wandering.shop]

Hell, if you disagree with me and think I'm wrong on the merits, then by all means make that argument! (Preferably not in my mentions, I'm tired of this whole debacle and am not personally open to changing my mind on LLMs right now.)

But "purity culture" isn't an argument, it's an appeal to the idea that holding principles is *bad*.

[cthos@mastodon.cthos.dev]

@xgranade My dude is torching his own credibility to use an LLM to check for typos.

TYPOS.

[pinskia@hachyderm.io]

@xgranade

It is like saying opposing cloud computer is purity culture. Or opposing Windows or Mac as being purity culture. Yes I have seen that later late.

[theorangetheme@en.osm.town]

@xgranade I read a great piece (boosted a bit ago) that made that point: if Doctorow had just said something like "hey, I use this tool to fix spelling and grammar stuff, and it's what works for me right now", it probably would've landed fine and people would've moved on. Oh but he just couldn't help himself.

[xgranade@wandering.shop]

(What do I mean when I say I'm not open to changing my mind on the issue at the moment? I mean that when I've tried to be open minded, I get flooded with bad-faith bullshit and outright propaganda. My being closed-minded here is a temporary and reasoned position about conserving my own energies, and not letting people DDoS my rationality. I don't think that the Discourse™ around LLMs is *currently* at a place where opposition to boosterism benefits from open-mindedness.)

[xgranade@wandering.shop]

I wouldn't be saying all this if it was just Doctorow, I'm even fine disagreeing with people I deeply respect. But he's not the only one saying shit like this, and I think it's worth calling out the broader rhetorical point.

[aud@fire.asta.lgbt]

@xgranade@wandering.shop guessing I missed something Doctorow said... and it sounds like I'm glad I did, because I like that my eyes have not currently rage melted out of my skull.

[dave@alvarado.social]

@aud @xgranade you should probably skip this one. White man in tech said white man in tech shit in a very "never meet your role models" kind of way.

[xgranade@wandering.shop]

@dave @aud I'm not personally sure I'd go quite that far. Someone I respect said something I vehemently disagree with, it happens. I don't think it'd be reasonable of me to insist that my heroes, as it were, agree with me on even all the important things.

I'm only being as pointed with the above because what he said is *also* something a lot of far worse people have said, and now they have more ammo.

[lunemercove@eldritch.cafe]

@xgranade generally I am very sick of the condescending attitude a lot of boosters tend to have about this. that because people are (justifiably!) upset about LLMs-in-practice, we're being unreasonable or hysterical (a word I use intentionally because it does feel like people mean that even if they don't say it).

I would be inclined to grant more good faith if it felt like any came from the boosters. or if the net effect of "well hold on maybe the answer is in the middle / maybe we can open source models etc etc" wasn't just normalizing this stuff further, on a broader scale.

[pathunstrom@ngmx.com]

@xgranade I was drafting a thing on principles at my factory job today.

I think at the front of that is probably going to be "having principles is good and important" because, yes, all of this.

[aud@fire.asta.lgbt]

@xgranade@wandering.shop @dave@alvarado.social it would be really nice if highly visible people quit it with the, "you know, you gotta hand it to the nazis on this one..."

[dave@alvarado.social]

@xgranade @aud yeah I should clarify I'm not saying he's not still a role model or that I don't also still respect him, I'm just saying in this case he very much said some white man in tech shit. Like, he used the word "neoliberal". That's a lapse in judgement when you're trying to defend your autocorrect.

[aud@fire.asta.lgbt]

@xgranade@wandering.shop @dave@alvarado.social also: imagine, if you will, using the term "purity culture" to refer to people (including many LGBTQ people) taking a stand against one of the major tools of christofascists

ffs

[dave@alvarado.social]

@aud @xgranade *hands Audrey some eye wash*

[aud@fire.asta.lgbt]

@xgranade@wandering.shop @dave@alvarado.social the current speaker of the house keeps tab on how often his son fucking masturbates

fuck off with "purity culture" to refer to people who are trying to keep culture alive... while many of the same people are also castigated by the actual purity culture fuckers for "sexual deviancy".