Congratulations on responding to the first paragraph of his post. https://lemmy.world/post/44873477/23080810 (The one that made you super cross. Sure nothing from your sandbox ever makes it into production. Great. Very wise and very careful.)
No congratulations on responding to any of the rest of what I said.
Ah yes, lovely mcp. Lovely anthropic mcp. Make sure you give anthropic lots of money and use their tools and then you’ll be completely safe plugging the output of the llm into the os. Definitely fine yes.
I bet you your contract with them says they’re not liable for shit their llm does to your files, your environment or your repositories, mcp or no mcp.
Fool.
You’ll be the 4753rd guy with the oops my llm trashed my setup and disobeyed my explicit rules for keeping it in check.
You know programmers who use llms believe they’re much more productive because they keep getting that dopamine hit, but when you actually measure it, they’re slower by about 20%.
You appointed yourself boss over a fast and plausible intern who pastes and edits a LOT of stack overflow code, but never really understands it and absolutely is incapable of learning. You either spend almost all of your time in code review now for your stupid sycophantic llm interns who always tell you you’re right but never learn from you, or you’re checking in vast quantities of shit to your projects.
You know really subtle, hard to find bugs on rare cases that pass your CI every single time? Or ones that no one in their right mind would have made, but yet they compile and look right at first glance. They’re now your main type of bug. You are rotting your projects with your random number generator.
And you think that all the money you’re playing for your blagging llms protects you from them fucking up everything for you. But it doesn’t. And you’ll also find that your contract with your llm supplier expressly excludes them from any liability whatsoever arising from you using it instead pre-blaming you for trusting it.
no its just the free models…
You just have to be aware… when using a cheap model
You: just the cheap ones
I never said that.
Ohhhhhhhhh ok yes of course you never said or implied that. Not your repeated message at all. And yet you can’t keep away from adressing your criticism towards free or cheap LLMs! It’s like your subtext or your underlying belief is that of you just pay big tech enough money and they can just build a big enough set of server farms, it’ll be ok. No, it will not be ok and the enshittification has begun from an already shitty base point.
All LLMs are shit, the cheap and free ones are indeed just easier to spot as generating shit, if you ask them about things you know about. But you have to accept that they’re ALL shit and STOP making get out clauses for the expensive ones by firing your criticisms exclusively at the cheap or free ones.
Giving ANY LLM executive power over your data is A BIG MISTAKE because you’re putting your data in the control of something which operates, at its heart, as a random number generator. They’re trained to sound right. People trust them because they sound right. This is a fundamental error.
Everyone else who has any sense: llms are shit and you shouldn’t trust them with executive power.
You: just the cheap ones.
Me: no, all of them. What kind of lunatic trusts control of anything important to a fundamentally stochastic process?
I love how your response to the catastrophic results of stupidly trusting ai is “pay more money to ai companies”.
Sane person’s response: don’t trust llms.
My mail provider isn’t that big. We got blocked by both outlook and gmail, but I duckduckwent a workaround which worked. Something about editing some mail record somewhere. Can’t remember what, I’m afraid.
Wow. I think if I lived in that sort of climate I might not be driving an electric car. But I also think the likelihood of me moving to a climate that hostile is low. Keep safe out there!
True, but I don’t need to charge at -30C, and this thing charges FAST.
Even some commercial less well known mail providers are sometimes blocked by big players like gmail and outlook for anti-spam reasons.
I was going to guess that it was one of Trump’s idiot corrupt collaborators or AI, and here it is, Elon Musk’s idiot collaborators.
No it isn’t!
Yes, but it isn’t just saying “no it isn’t”.
I can’t upvote this enough. You have good comic timing.
No it isn’t. Look, this isn’t an argument, it’s just contradiction.
When you try to watch a video on YouTube, you’re immediately confronted with an advertisement - a mandatory interruption designed to extract value from your attention. These ads are part of a calculated system where Google, YouTube’s parent company, turns every moment of your online experience into a monetizable commodity.
The process is frustratingly simple: an ad starts playing, and you’re given two unsatisfying choices. You can either sit through the entire advertisement or press the skip button after a few seconds, both of which serve Google’s ultimate goal of generating revenue. It’s a digital toll booth where you’re forced to pay with your time and personal data.
YouTube’s tracking algorithms scrutinize your online behavior, collecting vast amounts of personal information to serve ads that are supposedly “tailored” to your interests. In reality, this is just sophisticated surveillance masquerading as convenience. Every click, every viewed video, every moment of your online activity becomes a data point for their massive advertising machine.
When Google purchased YouTube in 2006 for $1.65 billion, they acquired more than just a video platform - they gained a powerful tool for data collection and targeted advertising. Content creators are essentially trapped in a system where they must play by Google’s rules, accepting whatever revenue scraps are thrown their way while the tech giant profits enormously.
The platform presents itself as a free service, but the real cost is your privacy and attention. Millions of users are funneled through an advertising pipeline, their viewing experiences constantly interrupted by corporate messaging. What was once a revolutionary platform for sharing videos has transformed into a highly sophisticated advertising delivery system.
Every ad you’re forced to watch represents a small victory for Google’s relentless monetization strategy. You’re not a viewer - you’re a product being sold to advertisers, your attention carved up and packaged into marketable segments. The “free” video you want to watch comes with strings attached - strings pulled tightly by one of the world’s most powerful tech corporations.
Just press skip.
No it isn’t! An argument is a connected sequence of statements designed to draw a conclusion. It isn’t just saying “no it isn’t”!
Ah yes, the CYMKI ink cartridges!
ftfy