• 9 posts
  • 14 comments
Joined 3 years ago
Cake day: January 25th, 2024
  • Linux@lemmy.ml•Why not LLMs?bygeneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
    5 days

    This is the exact opposite. Trying to ban AI from everything despite its use cases.

    Many people don’t know this but even Luddites didn’t oppose machinery. They simply opposed the ownership structure of it. So instead of saying “no LLM” you could say “Open-source/weight LLM’s allowed only”.

  • Linux@lemmy.ml•Why not LLMs?bygeneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
    5 days

    Issues of licensing and stolen code, potentially causing copyright problems which most open-source projects are poorly fit to resolve and may go down because of them

    What, we care about licenses and copyright now?

    Big tech has stolen all code and now everything it “open source”. You’re not going to get into legal trouble for using LLM generated code there’s no precedent for that. The only ones getting sued are the big tech companies who stole the code.

    Environmental impact of model training, huge data centers threatening water supplies, producing tons of e-waste, creating noise pollution, increasing power demand, including one from unclean sources at the critical point when we should reduce it as much as possible

    Sure but that’s mostly them training a gazillion new models. You could ban models from providers that are doing all these things and thus promote more efficient models.

    Deterioration in skill level of human coders and lack of avenues for juniors to learn to code properly, which is likely to stay as an essential thing to have

    Valid but understanding architecture and delegating writing the code and especially tests is becoming much more important than just artisan writing it these days.

    Outside coding, there are many ethical issues around companies producing LLM models, as many have ties to the military and police, and are heavily misused to fuel fascist regimes

    Like I said there’s local models as well. China puts out plenty of great open weight stuff like GLM5.3 which will likely have to run in the cloud but it’s still open weight.

Technology@lemmy.mlbygeneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
7 days

Revealed: Cisco talks with pro-Palestine employees over discrimination complaint collapse

www.middleeasteye.net

Conciliation talks mediated by a US federal agency between Cisco and a group of its own employees over complaints that the company discriminated against pro-Palestine workers have broken down after the technology firm was accused of failing to engage with the process in good faith, Middle East Eye can reveal.

The talks were facilitated by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), a federal agency that investigates allegations of worker discrimination, following a complaint by Bridge to Humanity (B2H), a group of Cisco employees created to raise concerns about the company’s ties with the Israeli military.

In a letter in June, the head of the EEOC’s local office in San Jose told Cisco and lawyers representing B2H that she had determined there was reasonable cause to believe the company had subjected some employees from Muslim and Middle Eastern backgrounds to a “hostile work environment” and proposed conciliation talks between the two parties.

Talks on an online video platform were then scheduled to take place in August.

But MEE understands that these collapsed before any negotiations had taken place, with the EEOC official telling B2H representatives and their lawyers that Cisco was not engaged in the process.

“Today CISCO has not come to the conversation in good faith,” the investigator said, according to multiple people present at the meeting who spoke to MEE. “I cannot allow conversations to continue.”

Christopher Ho, programme director for Legal Aid at Work and the lawyer representing B2H, described the abrupt end to the conciliation process as a “surprise” to his clients.

“We participated in conciliation for three hours, with little communication from Cisco. Around that time, the EEOC representative entered our virtual room and stated that Cisco would not respond to the EEOC’s proposal, and that therefore the EEOC was going to ‘fail’ the conciliation - which means ending it,” Ho told MEE.

“It was a surprise because we hadn’t even exchanged settlement proposals with Cisco.”

0