A really good paper I read last year from 1996 helped me grasp some of what is going only: Brave.Net.World [1]. In short, when the Internet first started to gro

A really good paper I read last year from 1996 helped me grasp some of what is going only: Brave.Net.World [1]. In short, when the Internet first started to grow, the information that was presented on it was controlled by an elitist group with either the financial support or genuine interest in hosting the material. As the Internet became more widespread that information became "democratized", or more differing opinions were able to get supported with the Internet. As we move on to LLMs becoming the primary source of information, we're currently experiencing a similar behavior. People are critical about what kind of information is getting supported, but only those with the money or knowledge of methods (coders building more tech-oriented agents) are supporting LLM growth. It won't become democratized until someone produces a consumer-grade model that fits our own world views. And that last part is giving a lot of people a significant number of headaches, but its the truth. LLMs' conversational method is what I prefer to the ad-driven / recommendation engine hellscape of modern Internet. But the counterpoint to that is people won't use LLMs if they can't use it how they want (similar to Right to Repair pushes). Will the LLM lie to you? Sure, but Pepsi commercials promise a happy, peaceful life. Doesn't that make an advertisement a lie too? If you mean lie on a grander world view scale, I get the concerns but remember my initial claim - "people won't use LLMs if the can't use it how they want". Those are prebaked opinions they already have about the world and the majority of LLM use cases aren't meant to challenge them but support them. [1] https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/eb045517/full/pdf https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/eb045517...