this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2024
630 points (95.0% liked)

Technology

59357 readers
4145 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago (14 children)

As I use copilot to write software, I have a hard time seeing how it'll get better than it already is. The fundamental problem of all machine learning is that the training data has to be good enough to solve the problem. So the problems I run into make sense, like:

  1. Copilot can't read my mind and figure out what I'm trying to do.
  2. I'm working on an uncommon problem where the typical solutions don't work
  3. Copilot is unable to tell when it doesn't "know" the answer, because of course it's just simulating communication and doesn't really know anything.

2 and 3 could be alleviated, but probably not solved completely with more and better data or engineering changes - but obviously AI developers started by training the models on the most useful data and strategies that they think work best. 1 seems fundamentally unsolvable.

I think there could be some more advances in finding more and better use cases, but I'm a pessimist when it comes to any serious advances in the underlying technology.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 21 hours ago (4 children)

So you use other people's open source code without crediting the authors or respecting their license conditions? Good for you, parasite.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I completely understand where you’re coming from, and I absolutely agree with you, genAI is copyright infringement on a weapons-grade scale. With that said, though, in my opinion, I don’t know if calling people parasites like this will really convince people, or change anything. I don’t want to tone police you, if you want to tell people to get fucked, then go ahead, but I think being a bit more sympathetic to your fellow programmers and actually trying to help them see things from our perspective might actually change some minds. Just something to think about. I don’t have all the answers, feel free to ignore me. Much love!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 52 minutes ago

You are right. My apologies, and my congratulations for finding the correct "tone" to respond to me ;) The thing is, I am absolutely fed up with especially the bullshit about snake oil vendors selling LLMs as "AI", and I am much more fed up with corporations on a large scale getting away with - since it's for profit - what I guess must already be called theft of intellectual property.

When people then use said LLMs to "develop software", I'm kind of convinced they are about as gone mentally as the MAGA cult and sometimes I just want to vent. However, I chose the word parasite for a reason, because it's a parasitic way of working: they use the work of other people, which for more specific algorithms, an LLM will reproduce more or less verbatim, while causing harm to such people by basically copy-pasting such code while omitting the license statement - thereby releasing such code (if open source) into the "wild" with an illegally(*) modified license.

  • illegal of course only in such countries whose legal system respects copyright and license texts in the first place

Considering on top the damage done to the environment by the insane energy consumption for little to no gain, people should not be using LLMs at all. Not even outside coding. This is just another way to contribute missing our climate goals by a wide margin. Wasting energy like this - basically because people are too lazy to think for themselves - actually gets people killed due to extreme weather events.

So yeah, you have a valid point, but also, I am fed up with the egocentric bullshit world that social media has created and that has culminated in what will soon be a totalitarian regime in the country that once brought peace to Europe by defeating the Nazis and doing a PROPER reeducation of the people. Hooray for going off on a tangent...

[–] [email protected] 6 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Very frequently, yes. As well as closed source code and intellectual property of all kinds. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 12 hours ago

Ah, I guess I'll have to question why I am lying to myself then. Don't be a douchebag. Don't use open source without respecting copyrights & licenses. The authors are already providing their work for free. Don't shit on that legacy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Programmers don't have the luxury of using inferior toolsets.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 12 hours ago

That statement is as dumb as it is non-sensical.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Ahh right, so when I use copilot to autocomplete the creation of more tests in exactly the same style of the tests I manually created with my own conscious thought, you're saying that it's really just copying what someone else wrote? If you really believe that, then you clearly don't understand how LLMs work.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 12 hours ago

I know both LLM mechanisms better than you, it would appear, and my point is not so weak that I would have to fabricate a strawman that I then claim is what you said, to proceed to argue the strawman.

Using LLMs trained on other people's source code is parasitic behaviour and violates copyrights and licenses.

load more comments (9 replies)