… almost everyone knows what we’re talking about, so the way we’re using language is fine.
You said it — almost. Not everyone knows or understands, so wouldn’t it be better to use the correct term instead of still using the wrong one? You’re saying almost because we’re on Lemmy, and yes, most Fediverse software users are techies. I have friends who talk about “AI,” I edited this to lessen confusion to the second paragraph. For more specific, they were talking that ‘AI is going to take our job, it can do copywriting for me’ but when I ask further, they’re actually talking about LLMs — which is not the same thing. And you yourself know it’s wrong, since you work in the related field. When I hear that, I just tell them, “It’s LLM, and LLMs are bla bla bla.” Whether they nod or not is on them, but at least they’ve been told the correct thing.
I accept being called a language prescriptivist in this case, because we’re here on Lemmy, most people are techies or nerds, and we’re discussing technology. In everyday conversation I’m not pedantic, but in technical contexts, precision matters.
This isn’t ‘whataboutism.’ I’m not opposing the substance of what’s being said, I’m pointing out how it’s being said. If we already know the correct term, why not use it? That’s not gatekeeping — that’s making the discussion clearer for everyone. As already being said on my previous comment, as an activist, that’s also your role being an educator. Without education, activism turns into noise.
I think this is how it should end. I agree with the substance of what’s being said, and you’ve already acknowledged my earlier point about where LLMs fit within the AI field. Since saying “AI is bad” as activism should also involve educating people with the correct term, I see this as a technical context rather than a public one. I respect your view since you’ve provided argumentation. Thanks.
You said it — almost. Not everyone knows or understands, so wouldn’t it be better to use the correct term instead of still using the wrong one? You’re saying almost because we’re on Lemmy, and yes, most Fediverse software users are techies. I have friends who talk about “AI,” I edited this to lessen confusion to the second paragraph. For more specific, they were talking that ‘AI is going to take our job, it can do copywriting for me’ but when I ask further, they’re actually talking about LLMs — which is not the same thing. And you yourself know it’s wrong, since you work in the related field. When I hear that, I just tell them, “It’s LLM, and LLMs are bla bla bla.” Whether they nod or not is on them, but at least they’ve been told the correct thing.
I accept being called a language prescriptivist in this case, because we’re here on Lemmy, most people are techies or nerds, and we’re discussing technology. In everyday conversation I’m not pedantic, but in technical contexts, precision matters.
This isn’t ‘whataboutism.’ I’m not opposing the substance of what’s being said, I’m pointing out how it’s being said. If we already know the correct term, why not use it? That’s not gatekeeping — that’s making the discussion clearer for everyone. As already being said on my previous comment, as an activist, that’s also your role being an educator. Without education, activism turns into noise.
I think this is how it should end. I agree with the substance of what’s being said, and you’ve already acknowledged my earlier point about where LLMs fit within the AI field. Since saying “AI is bad” as activism should also involve educating people with the correct term, I see this as a technical context rather than a public one. I respect your view since you’ve provided argumentation. Thanks.