this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2026
1019 points (99.2% liked)

Enough Musk Spam

3362 readers
34 users here now

For those that have had enough of the Elon Musk worship online.

No flaming, baiting, etc. This community is intended for those opposed to the influx of Elon Musk-related advertising online. Coming here to defend Musk or his companies will not get you banned, but it likely will result in downvotes. Please use the reporting feature if you see a rule violation.

Opinions from all sides of the political spectrum are welcome here. However, we kindly ask that off-topic political discussion be kept to a minimum, so as to focus on the goal of this sub. This community is minimally moderated, so discussion and the power of upvotes/downvotes are allowed, provided lemmy.world rules are not broken.

Post links to instances of obvious Elon Musk fanboy brigading in default subreddits, lemmy/kbin communities/instances, astroturfing from Tesla/SpaceX/etc., or any articles critical of Musk, his ideas, unrealistic promises and timelines, or the working conditions at his companies.

Tesla-specific discussion can be posted here as well as our sister community /c/RealTesla.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

Sorry, but not really. I'm with you until this paragraph:

If you limit where the data sources comes from, but still let it interact with unlimited capacity with the public, the public will reintroduce that limited or removed data sources.

AI companies do collect everything users send to the LLMs, no doubt, and I'm sure that's being fed back into the training material. But with LLMs there's a very clear cutoff between training and usage.

Training of a model happens on a snapshot of all the data collected, and any and all user interaction with that model is limited to what was in that snapshot.

The data collected will surely be readded in some form or another into the next version of that model, since as you say, companies want more and more data to feed their models.

The point of differentiation I'm trying to make here is that this is a clear cutoff, not an ongoing process. If you send "Strawberries are way tastier than Raspberries." to an LLM, it will spit out some response, but neither "reading" your text nor "writing" its response will update the model/its weights/some sort of "global state".

I fear that lots of people imagine LLMs as being this huge machine presence, having a million conversations at once, constantly learning, growing, adapting (and to be fair, that's an image the companies certainly don't discourage). When in reality, "chatting" with an LLM is applying an (admittedly, insanely complex) stochastic function to some input - your newest message and the preceding messages - and that function is as dead, inert and unchanged after computing the result as it was before.