• John@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    4 days ago

    My job bans deepseek. Because … China, or something 🤷‍♀️

  • Strayce
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 days ago

    Seems silly to limit it to one month of the year.

    • sudoer777@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      Fortunately we have a few more weeks to plan out how to make use of this model before it goes into effect

      • zbyte64@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        As if this technology isn’t a product and in service of capitalist relations. Go read Chomsky to see how CNC machines were designed in a way to strengthen capitalist control. gAI is being developed with the same business logic: eliminate jobs at the cost of quality and robustness.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Nah, I don’t think I’m going to take as gospel what a CIA asset say.

          Instead, go read Marx to understand the relationship between the technology and the social relations that dictate its use within a society.

          • zbyte64@awful.systems
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            I’ve read enough Marx to know the base dictates the shape of the superstructure which includes technology like LLMs.

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              Technology such as LLMs is just automation and that’s what the base is, how it is applied within a society is what’s dictated by the uperstructure. Open source LLMs such as DeepSeek are a productive force, and a rare instance where a advanced means of production is directly accessible for proletarian appropriation. It’s a classic base level conflict over the relations of production.

              • zbyte64@awful.systems
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                21 hours ago

                That’s an incredibly reactionary take on technology. Look at how open source is qualitatively different from their proprietary counterparts for a clear example of how the base doesn’t just dictate how a tool is used, but how tools are made and how the constraints built into the tool effect how they are used.

                • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  20 hours ago

                  You might want to learn what words like reactionary actually mean before using them. We are discussing an open source tool, which by its nature lacks the built-in constraints you are describing. Your argument is a piece of sophistry designed to create the illusion of expertise on a subject you clearly do not understand. You are not engaging with the reality of the technology, but with a simplified caricature of it.

      • CyberMonkey403@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        True. So should I care if my local bourgeoisie is using yankee or Chinese LLM to lay people off?