3 ms·

Because they’re going beyond their personal preference - which could be fulfilled by never using this feature - by trying to press their legitimate preferences

by benced 2y ago

Because they’re going beyond their personal preference - which could be fulfilled by never using this feature - by trying to press their legitimate preferences onto others by blackballing companies that even touch LLMs.

akira2501 2y ago
> beyond their personal preference My preference is to not use software which has these features in it. I don't need my terminal software having a network request layer which can exfiltrate my data to unknown third parties. You might feel comfortable with a labeled "off switch" but many of us do not. Is that an allowed preference? Or should I be ridiculed? > press their legitimate preferences onto others You mean describe their preferences openly and allow others to come to their own conclusion? Or are you suggesting that they're bullying other people into this position against their will? To me it seems the opposite. Whenever these criticisms come up there is a contingent dedicated to minimizing them to the point of suggesting that they should be openly ridiculed. Or that they've misunderstood their own preferences. Or that they've taken them "too far" somehow. > by blackballing companies that even touch LLMs. Yes, preferences even extend to economic decisions. People often forget that this is the basis of all economy.
- benced 2y ago
  iTerm has had a font fetcher, a crash reporter, and an automatic updater that all hit the internet for a while. Did anyone care? Is there anybody who turned off the crash reporter but started a fairly mean-spirited thread that the crash reporter was still in the binary? Is there anybody who didn't bother reading the code for what the crash reporter did and expressed that they're not "comfortable with a labeled 'off switch'"? Seems like this preference only comes up when the endpoint is an LLM. It's an isolated demand for rigor rooted in the visceral emotions LLMs seem to inspire.
  - bingo-bongo 2y ago
    iTerm did have at least one rather serious data leaking bug in the past. It was introduced in a new feature and enabled by default. People (or power users at least) tend to remember incidents like that. I don’t think it’s entirely “just because LLM’s”.
    - benced 2y ago
      I would find this persuasive if I could find a single mention of this bug in either of the GitLab threads or the original blog post. Also, what was the bug?

by benced 2y ago

akira2501 2y ago

> beyond their personal preference My preference is to not use software which has these features in it. I don't need my terminal software having a network request layer which can exfiltrate my data to unknown third parties. You might feel comfortable with a labeled "off switch" but many of us do not. Is that an allowed preference? Or should I be ridiculed? > press their legitimate preferences onto others You mean describe their preferences openly and allow others to come to their own conclusion? Or are you suggesting that they're bullying other people into this position against their will? To me it seems the opposite. Whenever these criticisms come up there is a contingent dedicated to minimizing them to the point of suggesting that they should be openly ridiculed. Or that they've misunderstood their own preferences. Or that they've taken them "too far" somehow. > by blackballing companies that even touch LLMs. Yes, preferences even extend to economic decisions. People often forget that this is the basis of all economy.

benced 2y ago
iTerm has had a font fetcher, a crash reporter, and an automatic updater that all hit the internet for a while. Did anyone care? Is there anybody who turned off the crash reporter but started a fairly mean-spirited thread that the crash reporter was still in the binary? Is there anybody who didn't bother reading the code for what the crash reporter did and expressed that they're not "comfortable with a labeled 'off switch'"? Seems like this preference only comes up when the endpoint is an LLM. It's an isolated demand for rigor rooted in the visceral emotions LLMs seem to inspire.
- bingo-bongo 2y ago
  iTerm did have at least one rather serious data leaking bug in the past. It was introduced in a new feature and enabled by default. People (or power users at least) tend to remember incidents like that. I don’t think it’s entirely “just because LLM’s”.
  - benced 2y ago
    I would find this persuasive if I could find a single mention of this bug in either of the GitLab threads or the original blog post. Also, what was the bug?