this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2026
225 points (93.8% liked)
Privacy
50359 readers
489 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
For me, I would personally make the adjustment:
chatgpt ---> NOTHING
I'd rather go my whole life with people ridiculing me for not using genAI then hand over my status as a person to any form of genAI.
Well that is good we don't have Gen AI yet if ever. I can't imagine how bad that well be look at what the shut we have now has caused.
Im fine with local only, but theres so many people that just vomit out exactly what claude says.
Or googles AI overview.
Do you feel that way about the other algorithms you do use? Nearly all code we do use was compiled and the compiler makes it's own decisions on how to convert abstract code into assembly or binary. Do you have anything against machines making decisions on that conversion?
But that is not the same. I can compile the same code with the same compiler and get the exact same code. This is not true of AI.
Analogies don't have to be one to one. I originally got this analogy from Linus Torvalds
Here's another
Compilers ain't a problem for me. Compilers aren't enabling people to claim writing they never wrote as their own so they can sell "books". Compliers aren't generating false information on purpose in order to trick me because it was built to be a gaslighting yes man¹. Compilers aren't deleting anything from certain files to whole directories¹ off my system unless I tell them to.
I don't have to worry about a compiler trying to steal all my data¹ in order to please braindead C-suites trying to replace all humans with clankers. So I have zero issues with a good genAI free compiler.
¹ unless they have been compromised/my system has been infected
I mean it does allow people to claim code they didn't necessarily write is there's. It seems that your issues aren't to do with LLMs fundamentally but specific use cases some individuals have chosen. Like you don't fundamentally have an issue with the algorithm itself.
I will concede on the algorithm. Can't get too mad at advanced maths, but I can get mad at the lazy people using it for nefarious purposes or just because they're lazy.
I mean may as well say you're mad at the internet because people use it for nefarious purposes as well. This is usually what I find about all these debates around AI and LLMs or NNs. It's more so people being legitimately upset at actions taken by some individuals or companies more so than any hatred for the technology itself but they conflate the two effortlessly. Like we're aware of how strange it sounds in different cases when that's done but for some reason with AI most don't see this issue in their argument.
What the hell are you talking about. Compilers do not insert code that wasn't put there. Now if your saying well you wrote C and the machine is running assembler then you are a moron.
If I'm a moron then so is Linus Torvalds since I literally stole the analogy from him. Generally speaking though these are all just algorithms and the issues people have aren't about this particular algorithm but the ways in which some people or companies are using the algorithm. It's a bit like saying you hate the internet because some people use the internet to do very harmful things.
Here's another
Not everyone use llm's for programming.
I have a feeling you didn't understand the question I was asking. Ilms are just one type of algorithm and data structure. There's other algorithms nearly all programers use to compile symbolic code Into assembly or machine code (binary), they're called compilers. Anyone who isn't writing assembly or machine code directly is likely using a compiler.
Your question is confusing to me, I know what compilers are but I'm not sure how that is super related to llm's. I was just saying that people use llm's for reasons aside from generating code.
ooh wait nevermind, I realise what you meant now. Your comparing compilers to llm's since they both are algorithms that turn an input into an output. Is this what you meant?
I got the comparison from Linus Torvalds talk but yes and depending on the compiler and it's use the output might not be so deterministic. More accurate to the point I'm actually making is is that these are all algorithms and the issues people have with AI isn't anything about the algorithms or the technology itself but the ways in which some people and companies are using it. May as well say you hate the internet because some people and some companies are using it to do very harmful things.
Here's another
The guy is an idiot and is comparing compilers to llms.
If I'm an idiot then so is Linus Torvalds the creator or the Linux kernel.
Here's another