h4890 @[email protected]

@nilesh @praveen Also note that this could equally apply to non-LLM code if an absurd definition of IP law is used.

@nilesh @praveen Easily solved by moving liability to the commiter by contract.

@josemurilo @pluralistic Lula is ver bad. I like Bolsonaro!

@praveen Why is it controversial? If the code does what it does, and is easy to understand, why would you not accept it?

If someone sends you thousand lines of vibe coded b.s. of course you must reject it, regardless of if it does what it claims to do or not.

If the contributor cannot be bothered to make the code easily understandable, LLM or no LLM, I do not see why it should take up your time.

@Suiseiseki @Vivaldi @jon

Beating children is abuse. Producing and selling a web browser is a regular business. equating that with abuse is juts absurd.

As for markets, you can look up the meaning. It is an aggregate of human beings, and they are the only ones who can think and act on the market. Again you lose badly. But I suspect you are a communist or a socialist, and as such, a creature driven by hatred and envy. I pity you.

@Suiseiseki @Vivaldi @jon

Incorrect. Absent any conscious mind being aware of the service, it's design is meaningless. Abuse is a value judgment, it is not a fact of nature, which makes it an ethical claim. Ethical claim needs value carriers, and if the valuation is not done, that is, ipso facto, not so.

This is the general case, where you have been refuted.

In terms of Vivaldi, you of course have a subjective, but absurd, opinion, but that is not what we are discussing.

@Suiseiseki @Vivaldi @jon desires, as well as the people meeting those.

My point still stands, and I have successfully refuted your post.

@Suiseiseki @Vivaldi @jon Your statement is logically incorrect. If a service is abusive, and no one uses it, or even knows about it, it does not matter. It cannot, by definition, be abusive, since no one is using it. Abusive depends on someone experiencing it as abusive. If no one does it, it is a nullity.

You must also study deeply, markets. There is no such thing as a market that wants something. it is the aggregate of billions of peoples wishes and

@Suiseiseki @Vivaldi @jon How is that abuse? Have you been forced against your will to use Vivaldi? Like with most things on the market, if you don't like it, don't use it.

@cocaine_owlbear delta chat.

@jon There are no truths, only perceptions of truth.

As long as a human being is involved, there will always be bias, and yes, AI:s are created and curated by humans, so it naturally inherits the bias of its creators.

The best one can do is to be aware of it, and select multiple sources to get a well rounded picture of a topic.

In an ideal world, this is what newspapers and journalists did. Today they sadly have abandoned that job and become more ideological and one sided.

@remixtures Best tip is to base your instance choice on the fediblock list.

That way you get freethinkers and not just woke homos who ban everyone with a different opinion.

@rolle There is probably a named law that says that the bigger the community, the lower the quality of the content and participants.

The best communities are niche and small.

I am a member of some mailinglists, and just the format is so off putting for most people, that it acts as a beautiful barrier to entry, allowing only interesting people to slip through.

1678 seeders online, so certainly popular in the darker corners of the internet! 😎

Interesting new movie critizising immigration.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVxmjwaPEFU

I wonder if this will be completely banned in europe? Will be interesting to see if the movie manages to get any attention at all.

@troed Ahhh.... please bring back the Sony Ericsson dumbphone with a 3.5" screen. That was the best phone I ever had!

@inkorrupt Das ist ein riesen Schlange! 🇮🇱

@troed I believe it can make you 10-15% more efficient at corporate IT jobs. I have also seen how AI has led to decrease in efficiency at law firms and legal departments.

Before AI, a careful investigation and a reasoned answer was enough. Post-AI, managers, investors & co, often reject the opinion of the legal department due to an AI hallucinating a law, and forces them to do the job all over again, only to discover that it was ,in fact, illegal.

End result, massive waste of time and money.