Replying to @⁨eicker@lemmy.world⁩

If LLMs can’t be made more power efficient, then the technology isn’t ready yet for general use. There may have to be fundamental engineering breakthroughs before what these systems do can be more than a very expensive and inefficient worldwide proof of concept.

Of course, the military and the surveillance industry will still want to keep it, even if no one else can afford it, and we’ll be the ones paying for it.

Replying to @⁨floofloof@lemmy.ca⁩

But without widespread usage there won’t be any breakthroughs… Anti-LLM folk could redirect their attention to the core problem (energy source, wind and solar shouldn’t raise any concerns) but they prefer to attack the LLMs themselves. Early implementations of every technology were crazy energy ineffective at the moment when becoming practically useful.

Replying to @⁨ISOmorph@feddit.org⁩

We understand LLM is great at something but we can never get passed the facts that you’ve stated and it also isn’t great in all thing like we’re being sold to and forced to look at everyday. If the tech stay with the professional and not given to the general public, if there’s no cunts telling everyone to adapt or get thrown out, if there’s no mass disruption toward people’s living, i’m sure it would be much more acceptable. The biggest issue with the tech is the cunt parading it.

Edited ⁨⁨Oct⁩ ⁨15⁩, ⁨2026⁩, ⁨09:29⁩⁩en