They were not talking about LLMs being participants of anything, but people who are against LLMs in whatever capacity. Surely people can be participants of a movement.
>> All I can say to this is that my position is Large Language Models (LLM's) are a combination of algorithms and data.
>> As as such, for me they do not qualify as anything to be either "pro" or "anti", let alone a participant of an activist movement.
> They were not talking about LLMs being participants of anything ...
Clearly I was referencing LLM's being something to foment "an activist movement" in an attempt to de-escalate the implication of there being some kind of "anti-LLM activist movement."
> ... but people who are against LLMs in whatever capacity. Surely people can be participants of a movement.
At this point your replies to my posts appear to be intentionally adversarial.
> Clearly I was referencing LLM's being something to foment "an activist movement" in an attempt to de-escalate the implication of there being some kind of "anti-LLM activist movement."
Well, no, that really wasn't clear to me at all. I don't think it was clear in general either.
> At this point your replies to my posts appear to be intentionally adversarial.
Not my actual intention, apologies, although I 100% understand if at this point that is not at all believable.
"Anti-AI Explained: Why Resistance to Artificial Intelligence Is Growing
As AI tools become more advanced, a growing chorus of critics is raising alarms about job loss, misinformation and other societal risks. Learn what’s fueling the anti-AI movement."
