@mro@digitalcourage.social Valid points. The âLargeâ in LLM indeed mirrors the âBigâ in Big ITâthat is precisely the materialist contradiction I'm highlighting. Currently, the scale required for these models forces a centralized, corporate structure.
Regarding productivity: as a developer, I view LLM not just as a âcode generatorâ (where the Âą20% debate happens), but as a new layer of interface for complex information. Whether it's asbestos or X-ray, the reality is that the âmeansâ are already being deployed at a massive scale, shaping our digital society.
You mentioned focusing on the ends. I agree. But in our current system, the âendsâ are dictated by those who own the âmeans.â If the means (LLMs) remain a corporate monopoly, the âendsâ will always be profit and surveillance.
My argument for socialization isn't about âmore softwareâ for the sake of it; it's about reclaiming the power to define the âends.â We can't democratically decide how to use (or even limit) a technology if we don't own the infrastructure it runs on. Even if we decide to use it ânarrowly and carefullyâ like X-rays, that decision should belong to the public, not a boardroom.