LLMs are tools that make it easier to hack incentives, but you still need a person to decide that they'll use an LLM t do so.

Blaming LLMs is unproductive. They are not going anywhere (especially since open source LLMs are so good.)

If we want to achieve real change, we need to accept that they exist, understand how that changes the scientific landscape and our options to go from here.

everyone keeps claiming "they're here to stay" as if it's gospel. this constant drumbeat is rather tiresome and without much hard evidence.

Genuinely curious, did we ever manage to ban a piece of technology worldwide and effectively?

Do chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) mostly banned by the Montreal Protocol count?

And lead in gasoline, and probably quite a few other things where we found a way to get similar end results with fewer annoying side effects.

A large part of geopolitics is concerned with limiting the spread of weapons of mass destruction worldwide and to the greatest possible degree of efficacy. Moreover, the investment to train state-of-the-art models is greater than the Manhattan project and involves larger and more complex supply chains-- it cannot be done clandestinely. Because the scope of the project is large and resource-intensive there are not many bodies that would have to cooperate in order to place impassable obstacles on the path that is presently being taken. 'What if they won't cooperate toward this goal?' -- Worth considering, but the fact is that they can and are choosing not to. If the choice is there it is not an inevitability but a decision.

> Worth considering, but the fact is that they can and are choosing not to. If the choice is there it is not an inevitability but a decision.

Pakistan, Israel, North Korea and South Africa have nuclear weapons while not having the right to do so. So I'm not sure how banning graphics cards, thing we are already failing at in China right now will ever work. Especially if countries like China develop their own chip building capacities.

If they go away, it's because they have been replaced by something better(worse) like LLLM or LLMM or whatever.

I'old enough to remember when GAN where going to be used to scam millions of people and flood social media with fake profiles.

What evidence do you need exactly?

I think such statements are likely projections of people's own unwillingness to part with such tools given their own personal perceived utility.

I, for one, wouldn't give up LLMs. Too useful to me personally. So, I will always seek them out.

LLMs are not people. We can’t blame them.

What would be the point of blaming LLMs? What would that accomplish? What does it even mean to blame LLMs?

LLMs are not submitting these papers on their own, people are. As far as I'm concerned, whatever blame exists rests on those people and the system that rewards them.

Perhaps what is meant is "blame the development of LLMs." We don't "blame guns" for shootings, but certainly with reduced access to guns, shootings would be fewer.

Guns have absolutely nothing to do with access to guns.

Guns are entirely inert objects, devoid of either free will nor volition, they have no rights and no responsibilities.

LLMs likewise.

  To every man is given the key to the gates of heaven. The same key opens the gates of hell.

-Richard Feynman

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/421467-to-every-man-is-give...

https://calteches.library.caltech.edu/1575/1/Science.pdf

This was a problem before LLMs and it would remain a problem if you could magically make all of them disappear.

LLMs are not the root of the problem here.

I blame keyboards, without them there wouldn't be these problems.