The whole energy use argument is deeply misguided because it rests on the assumption that the situation would be different without AI tech. That is completely at odds with historical precedent where we already saw the same pattern with stuff like crypto. Other things like streaming media also use huge amounts of energy. Singling out this one particular tech seems strange to say the least. And of course, the actual problem stems from the way capitalism works, and if you’re genuinely concerned about this then focus on that. As long as capitalist relations continue, energy waste will continue to be baked into the system.

And it’s so very American of you to assume that everybody should care about what’s going on in your failed state. The fact is that this tech is being developed in China as well where these problems don’t exist. Which comes back to my previous point that the issue is with the capitalist relations rather than the technology itself.

The efficiency of these systems is improving at an incredible speed. You can run local Qwen today on a consumer grade laptop that beats a frontier model from less than a year ago. In a year or two, local models will be the norm for programming. The whole hyperscale compute thing is just a brief mainframe era of this tech. So, using that as an argument is just silly.

Meanwhile, all content is human made because LLMs are just a tool that a human uses. This whole narrative is frankly bizarre beyond belief.

I don’t know if you were aware, but burgerland doesn’t have a monopoly on LLM development. And nowadays there are competent models you can even run locally that work just fine for coding.

This whole trope that AI is very resource intensive is completely outdated, while people like you just keep parroting it uncritically. You’re certainly not going to be solving extreme climate change by banning LLM assisted code on a niche community. This is the most lib brained take ever.

I strongly disagree with this. The reality is that using LLMs to build things is becoming increasingly more common. And just because something is built using LLMs doesn’t automatically make it slop or useless. There are plenty of genuinely useful open source projects built with these tools, and just because you’re personally opposed to that is not a reason to ban them outright.

This is why we have the voting system on Lemmy as well. If people post slop whether it’s human or LLM assisted, then it can get downvoted naturally. I also see zero evidence of this community drowning in any sort of slop.

That’s not what writing a program from scratch means lmfao.

It’s absolutely ethical to ignore copyrights.

LLM is a general purpose tool, it’s not trained on a specific task. Again, using this logic you’d have to train a human developer from scratch for every program you write.

Simple answer is that there’s still nothing comparable to M architecture. It has the benefit of unified memory and SoC which eliminates the bus. And being RISC, it has small fixed size instructions which can be read in batches, then any instructions that don’t have a dependency within the batch can be executed in parallel. This makes it possible to just add more cores and parallelize against them. You can’t do this with CISC because instructions are all different length, and figuring out the dependencies and what needs to be read into a batch becomes expensive really fast negating the gains of running stuff in parallel.

By that definition no human programmer writes anything from scratch either.

clearly that didn’t help you much

🤣

I do open source software and have been doing it for many years. I understand open source licenses very well. DeepSeek assigns all rights of the outputs to you, which makes you the legal entity with the ownership of the code:

4.2 Subject to applicable law and our Terms, you have the following rights regarding the Inputs and Outputs of the Services: (1) You retain any rights, title, and interests—if any—in the Inputs you submit; (2) We assign any rights, title, and interests—if any—in the Outputs of the Services to you.

Meanwhile, your confusion when you talk about stealing the code stems from your lack of understanding of how LLMs actually work. People tend to confuse the output looking similar to training data with the mechanism being simple retrieval. There is no database or a lookup table, and there is no copy of any text they were trained on tucked away somewhere inside the weights. What they have is a compressed statistical model of the patterns that exist across trillions of tokens the text was broken down into. When you ask an LLM a question it does not go find the relevant code and regurgitate it. What actually happens is that it generates text token by token based on the probability distribution it learned during training. It’s more akin to the way state machines like Markov chains work.

If anything, the way LLMs work is actually much closer to how humans improvise or combine ideas than to how a search engine or database works. When you write a sentence, you don’t pull up a specific piece of code you memorized from some repository and copy it. You’ve absorbed the patterns from countless examples of language over your lifetime and internalized them. Coding is a process of generating novel combinations based on those patterns.

Similarly, the weights of a model encode statistical regularities about word co occurrence, syntactic structures, semantic relationships, and higher level conceptual patterns. When it generates text it is combining those patterns in ways that were never present in the training data. That’s how LLMs produce entirely novel sentences that have never been written before, and why they can be prompted to combine ideas from different domains in creative ways.

LLMs can reproduce training data verbatim in some cases, but this happens because of overfitting on rare or repeated sequences. When a specific string appears many times in the training data like a famous quote or a common error message the model learns to assign an extremely high probability to each token in that exact sequence. So when it generates it follows the most likely path to reproduce the original text. It is similar to how a human can memorize a song or a poem by hearing it many times but that does not mean our general language ability works by pulling up stored copies from memory.

We’re talking about the worker, not the bourgeoisie. Their labour was exploited to benefit a corporate entity. And you’re consuming stolen proceeds from the bourgeoisie and defending their contributions.

You can certainly make this argument when it comes to closed corporate models. However, it completely falls apart when applied to open models that aren’t owned by any corporation. Open models are available for everyone to use, and you running Qwen on your machine isn’t benefiting any corporate entity in the slightest. And the whole stolen goods angle is basically the RIAA anti-piracy argument, you should be deeply ashamed of yourself for parroting it.

You’re also confusing tools with the actual capitalist system here which makes your entire argument deeply incoherent. It is simply not possible to avoid using anything produced by exploited labour while living in a capitalist society. And nobody is defending capitalism here.

I would urge you to spend a bit of time trying to actually understand the subject you’re attempting to discuss here to form a coherent position on it.

OpenRA is great, but that’s the older 2d C&C engine implementation. OpenTS is the newer 3d engine.

I’m not shilling for any big AI companies. Chinese companies release their models in the open, and now we even have models like Qwen that run locally and can do more useful work than frontier models from half a year go. Complaining that this is stealing is like complaining that downloading a torrent is stealing. But you do you, but whatever you do, don’t copy that floppy!

human slop, discussion forums deserve better than your vapid braying

Nothing is being stolen child. Also hilarious how you trolls all of a sudden think copyrights are really important. Any rational person understands that copyrights exist to protect the corps, but I guess expecting intellectual consistency from the likes of you is too much to ask. Meanwhile, big news to me that China is fascist. At least try to come up with some coherent talking points to make your trolling less obvious.

This is you right here:

Can you lot just stop spamming every thread with this irrelevant screeching? Nobody cares about your performative outrage, your comment add absolutely nothing to the conversation. Nobody is forcing you to use the code, so if you don’t like it, just move on like an adult instead of throwing a public tantrum. This is the online equivalent of a kid rolling around screaming on the floor at a supermarket.

as expected, another vapid reddit.world opinion

hands down

works fine here