Comment on Lemmy be like

• PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  This is how etymology works.

  Do you think all the words we use today meant exactly the same thing 300 years ago?
  No, people used it “incorrectly” and that usage gains popularity, and that makes it correct.

  What you call illiteracy is literally how etymology works.

  source

  • occultist8128@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Just to clarify, do you personally agree that LLMs are a subset of AI, with AI being the broader category that includes other technologies beyond LLMs?

    I come from a technical background and have worked in AI to help people and small businesses whether it’s for farming, business decisions, and more. I can’t agree with the view that AI is inherently bad; it’s a valuable tool for many. What’s causing confusion is that ‘AI’ is often used to mean LLMs, which is inaccurate from a technical perspective. My goal is simply to encourage precise language use to avoid misunderstandings. People often misuse words in ways that stray far from their original etymology. For example, in Indonesia, we use the word ‘literally’ as it’s meant — in a literal sense, not figuratively, as it’s often misused in English nowadays. The word ‘literally’ in Indonesian would be translated as ‘secara harfiah,’ and when used, it means exactly as stated. Just like ‘literally,’ words should stay connected to their roots, whether Latin, Greek, or otherwise, as their original meanings give them their true value and purpose.

    source

    • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      Depending on context, jargon and terminology change.
      In this context, I’d agree that LLMs are a subset tech under the umbrella term “AI”. But in common English discourse, LLM and AI are often used interchangeably. That’s not wrong because correctness is defined by the actual real usage of native speakers of the language.

      I also come from a tech background. I’m a developer with 15 years experience, and I work for a large company, and my job is currently integrating LLMs and more traditional ML models into our products, because our shareholders think we need to.
      Specificity is useful in technical contexts, but in these public contexts, almost everyone knows what we’re talking about, so the way we’re using language is fine.

      You know it’s bad when someone with my username thinks you’re being too pedantic lol. Dont be a language prescriptivist.

      source

      • occultist8128@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        … 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,” 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.

        source