• Saledovil@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Animal agriculture has significantly better utility and scaling than LLMs. So, its not hypocritical to be opposed to the latter but not the former.

    • threeduck@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 hours ago

      The holocaust was well scaled too. Animal ag is responsible for 15-20% of the entire planets GHG emissions. You can live a healthier, more morally consistent life if you give up meat.

        • thatcrow@ttrpg.networkBanned
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Not really. It shows that he used scale in the appropriate manner.

          I think you’re just grasping at straws by saying what sounds nice in your head instead of engaging in a legitimate argument.

          • Saledovil@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 hours ago

            I said “scaling” not “scale”. “Scaling” refers to how output and expenses of the enterprise behaves as it becomes bigger or smaller. Threeduck seems to think it means “big”. And then immediately refers the holocaust for some reason.

            Though, the term is broad, hence why I asked them about how they interpret the term.