this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2026

325 points (96.6% liked)

linuxmemes

linuxmemes@lemmy.world

32,801 readers

7,124 active

1,071 users here now

Hint: :q!

Sister communities:

Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

Instance-wide TOS: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
Lemmy code of conduct: https://join-lemmy.org/docs/code_of_conduct.html

2. Be civil

Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.

Do not harrass or attack users for any reason. This includes using blanket terms, like "every user of thing".

Don't get baited into back-and-forth insults. We are not animals.

Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.

Bigotry of any kind will not be tolerated. This is an LGBTQ+-friendly community -- if that is a problem for you, you should leave.

3. Post Linux-related content

Including Unix and BSD.

Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.

No porn, no politics, no trolling or ragebaiting.

Don't come looking for advice, this is not the right community.

4. No recent reposts

Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, <loves / tolerates / hates> systemd, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.

5. 🇬🇧 Language/язык/Sprache

This is primarily an English-speaking community. 🇬🇧🇦🇺🇺🇸

Comments written in other languages are allowed.

The substance of a post should be comprehensible for people who only speak English.

Titles and post bodies written in other languages will be allowed, but only as long as the above rule is observed.

6. (NEW!) Regarding public figures

We all have our opinions, and certain public figures can be divisive. Keep in mind that this is a community for memes and light-hearted fun, not for airing grievances or leveling accusations.

Keep discussions polite and free of disparagement.

We are never in possession of all of the facts. Defamatory comments will not be tolerated.

Discussions that get too heated will be locked and offending comments removed.

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.

founded 3 years ago

moderators

poopsmith@lemmy.world

zephyr@lemmy.world

rtxn@lemmy.world

Ken Thompson Hack 2.0 (thelemmy.club)

submitted 3 weeks ago by einfach_orangensaft@sh.itjust.works to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world

94 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 weeks ago (34 children)

It's a tool, use it where it works and don't where it doesn't.

hideshow 34 child comments

[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 26 points 3 weeks ago* (8 children)

That saying (or, dare I say, thought-terminating cliché) glosses over the consideration of risks and costs that result from its uncritical usage. No sane person should trust it without serious reservations just because it fits the purpose, and that's true whether or not it bears the latest combination of letters peddled by tech bros. It's a dangerous, irresponsible mentality. It's a tool the same way a sledgehammer made out of plutonium is a tool.

parent

hideshow 8 child comments

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Plutonium sledgehammer sounds fucking awesome though

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Pretty effective because of its high density, too. It's a shame it's brittle and would give you heavy metal poisoning.

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

As ways to die go that also sounds pretty rad

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] frosch@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

Oh, that would be rad alright

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 1 point 3 weeks ago

Unless you pick a particularly short-lived isotope, the radiation wouldn't have time to hurt you before you died of regular heavy metal poisoning like you'd get from something boring like lead or mercury.

parent

[–] db2@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

🤘

parent

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works -3 points 3 weeks ago

I mean in an old nuclear bomb that's pretty much the situation. Use a conventional explosive to slam some plutonium like a sledgehammer and nukes have proven to be a strong deterrent when a country had them. Still a tool with a use case

parent

[+] Franconian_Nomad@feddit.org -6 points 3 weeks ago

Your comment is a sweeping statement that is thought terminating itself.

No sane person should trust it without serious reservations just because it fits the purpose

Using a tool for something it’s intended for automatically involves some thought process. And this thought process also involves its limitations and potential for danger.

Your criticism stems from your dislike for AI and your opinion that it’s generally not useful. An opinion that is shared widely here, but with little to no proof at all.

parent

[–] Ooops@feddit.org 7 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

It’s a tool, use it where it works and don’t where it doesn’t.

But that doesn't work with the people creating AI as they are totally dependent on the believe that AI can do absolutely everything (and an artificial general intelligence is just moments away...) to justify they insane investments. So they will make up a million stupid narratives why some people are "actually" not using AI as it obviously can't be because of AI shortcomings...

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

If the tool don't work then don't use it. I wouldn't try to unscrew something with chopsticks

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Ooops@feddit.org 2 points 3 weeks ago

You are probably also one of those insane ideologues that refuse to hammer in a screw for some reason, although you know how well that hammer worked on nails... 😂

parent

[–] xyguy@startrek.website 7 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

People probably say that about asbestos too.

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 1 point 3 weeks ago

And they'd be right

parent

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works -3 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

Of course, it still has uses. Just not in home insulation.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Your comment is so fit for purpose, displaying such a massive willful ignorance about the world in general. Because the biggest problem with asbestos wasn't using it for home insulation. It killed millions of workers in manufacturing plants and mines. Its biggest industrial use case was for electrical insulation of high voltage transmission lines. Where it also killed hundreds of thousands of technicians in the us alone. Before that it was used for lamp wicks. Where it killed at least a couple of millions more over a century. Today, asbestos kills 250 thousand people a year, 12 to 15 thousand in the us every year.

I supposed any tool can be considered useful if you're ignorant enough about it or if you're willing to lie without remorse.

parent

[–] one_old_coder@piefed.social 6 points 3 weeks ago

And then your boss says: "Use it for everything or you're fired. Why are you using less tokens than anyone else? You must be more productive or else..."

parent

[–] atopi@piefed.blahaj.zone 6 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

If a tool costs more to be made than the equivalent of buying every single person on earth a loaf of bread every single day for 300 days, only for it to have niche uses, that only helps what is possible with already existing tools, is it worth it?

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works -2 points 3 weeks ago* (1 child)

That all depends on how it was made. Not all models cost that much. Chinese models were mostly produced for far less mostly.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 1 point 3 weeks ago

Anything is cheap if you just steal it.

parent

[–] AudaciousArmadillo@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 weeks ago (13 children)

Na, fuck that shit. Just don't use it.

parent

hideshow 13 child comments

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works -1 points 3 weeks ago (12 children)

Why? Do you have that feeling towards other algorithms?

parent

hideshow 12 child comments

[–] AudaciousArmadillo@piefed.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 weeks ago (9 children)

Yes I do 😊

parent

hideshow 9 child comments

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works -1 points 3 weeks ago (8 children)

Like which ones and why?

parent

hideshow 8 child comments

[–] AudaciousArmadillo@piefed.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 weeks ago (7 children)

Usually the ones that accelerate the destruction of our planet, perpetuate sexist and racist biases, pray opon the weaknesses of how our minds work, exploit the underprivileged, devalue humanity and artistry, are annoying and overhyped, I think you get the picture.

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works -2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (6 children)

So which algorithm is that? If you're hinting at manipulating the populace because in fact they are easily programmed via social network manipulation. Yeah anything done maliciously is of course bad but I think that comes down to the use of the tools and not the intrinsic nature of the tools themselves. Algorithms are just math, it's the will of the individuals wielding them that is corrupt and that seems to be your actual chief complaint.

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] AudaciousArmadillo@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

I did not say that. You, like everyone else that says "its just a tool and technology is neutral", should read more books about ethics, politics and sociology. Everything we do is political. Nothing is "neutral".

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works -1 points 3 weeks ago* (4 children)

I'm not saying the use cases that some have chosen for certain tools is neutral. Their behavior is indeed bad and should be called out. Ai for instance is at it's core just a mathematical structure that has no intrinsic behavior, same for the concept of algorithms for social media or algorithms for drones or algorithms for the internet. Yeah some people use the internet to cause a lot of harm or even guide the outcomes of nations but is it the fault of html, CSS, and JavaScript? Not really. The problem is some companies, some people, some government officials and their choices.

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] AudaciousArmadillo@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Firstly "AI" is a meaningless marketing term. And LLMs are fundamentally flawed. And especially anything by OpenAI/Anthropic/Meta/xAI should be avoided as they have shown zero regard for the actual negative impact of their products.

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works -1 points 3 weeks ago* (2 children)

Sure, you know the term existed long before it became a financial buzz word right? Anyways in which sense are LLMs or NNs fundamentally flawed? I still believe your chief complaint is about the actions of people and not some mathematical structure much in the same way arguments about engagement algorithms on social media platforms is more about people and their choices than C++ or a binary tree.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] AudaciousArmadillo@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

You know that it was a financial buzzword from the very beginning? I'll leave you with a reading suggestion: 'The AI con" from Timnit Gebru and Emily Bender. The latter also has various lectutes online about the topic.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

How would you prefer people talk technology that allows machines to think, learn, and perform tasks that usually require human intelligence?

We could encode some behavior with mechanical automaton but we can encode far more behavior and more complex behavior with electronic computers. There's no known strict limit beyond computation to the complexity of behavior we can encode. Now with a fully digitized fruit fly brain one can theorize about a fully digitized human brain. What would we call this if not artificial intelligence? How about other models that encode approximate behavior to human level intelligence?

The term has linguistic meaning and isn't just marketing nonsense like calling food products all natural. That said there's definitely been a ramp up of people calling essentially if-else chains artificial intelligence, lots of abuse of the term.

parent

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world -2 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

Pmuch this.

How do they feel about machine language translations? It's been "AI" (ML model) since the late 90's.

Traffic prediction?

Medical scan data processing?

And so so many more specific uses of ML models that have been a part of daily life for literal decades.

Call out LLMs specifically.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] AudaciousArmadillo@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 weeks ago

Did we burn down that planet for that stuff? Exploit workers to do weather forcasting?

parent