Well, you dismissed the lack of ethics of it all. Just because you do open source doesn’t mean everyone else does. And open source often acknowledges contributors, unlike LLMs. You can’t consent for other people.

It’s hideously destructive. Wastes electricity, wastes water, plays merry hell with anywhere the damned data centers pop up.

It’s unregulated and has already killed people. Multiple stories have come out where an LLM has encouraged suicide. Plus various dangerous outputs like the bleach as cake ingredient thing. Because…

It isn’t intelligent, it’s just a parrot. I’ll start paying attention when it can successfully count letters in words. So would you trust a random parrot that told you about something you know nothing about?

It doesn’t do a quarter of what it says. Translation should be its bread and butter and it can’t really manage that. There’s a reason the tech bros that hyped crypto are hyping this. Because they don’t actually know what it can or can’t do.

It’s approaching max efficacy for current techniques. More data is better in machine learning, but it’s finding the limit and it’s way closer than the scammers want to admit.

It’s destroying jobs before it can handle them. I’ve tried to use it before. I spent as much if not more time fixing its output than if I had done it myself. It gets to do my boilerplate sometimes now.

It’s making worse workers. All that time agonizing over a problem was spent learning how to do it at all. Now it shits out worthless garbage that the person doesn’t know what it does or how to fix it. Job security for me I guess.

It could be a useful technology, but the delusion that it’s capable of becoming AGI distracts from all the things it could be capable of if big companies actually tried to use them instead of the lazy implementations they’re chasing.

Source: Data engineer