oh I see, now that graphene purged all their posts someone convenient has popped up to accuse me of being a CIA/mossad op and try to assert a ridiculously distorted version of events (“all they did is commit an agents.md”, which isn’t even what started the thread. david dug up the agents.md because graphene was already doing damage control claiming an LLM would never be used to write code, and the agents.md of course had instructions for the LLM to write code)
and of course it’s the activist with the credible domestic violence accusations from both the people they’ve had kids with
shitheads of a feather I suppose
reshared this
[object Object]
in reply to [object Object] • • •I don’t think this is smart enough to be an op, but I’d like to point out the obvious:
- graphene has no business deleting its public statements, regardless of the response they’re receiving, unless they’ve got something to hide
- anyone coming to graphene’s defense without reading the deleted statements is operating without crucial information
- graphene cultivates an unhinged community
- pointing out that a privacy project is doing something shady and damaging is a public good. nobody involved here is doing this to hurt anyone vulnerable. we know how bad things can go if trust is placed in the wrong hands.
- maybe limit the amount of trust you give to a person who has two independent credible DV allegations against them by people they held power over??? maybe????
reshared this
node_red, David Gerard, Jonathan Schofield, Dźwiedziu and Ozzelot reshared this.
[object Object]
in reply to [object Object] • • •and like, it’s actually really easy to get people back when a project fucks up like this: do what servo did. apologize, be transparent, and promise to materially do better by banning LLMs from your codebase
of course graphene won’t do this because they’ve asserted that they have to use LLMs to write secure code (again, a thing that’s working so great for the AI corps that keep having incidents), and because transparency means explaining that weird contractor shit they brought up (an unforced error on their part)
in order to do better, graphene would have to… do better. I don’t think I’ve ever seen them change course in response to external pressure. maybe that was an asset at some point in the past, but it really isn’t now.
reshared this
David Gerard, Jonathan Schofield, Dźwiedziu, Simon Zerafa, Ozzelot and Lazarou Monkey Terror 🚀💙🌈 reshared this.
[object Object]
in reply to [object Object] • • •reshared this
David Gerard and Dźwiedziu reshared this.
mancube
in reply to [object Object] • • •at some point they said something about how i've been supporting and boosting their posts up until now and like ... yeah ... exactly.
letting people down should feel bad and you should feel bad for doing it. instead they seem to think everything is part of some kind of whatever-chan d list youtube influencer conspiracy
reshared this
[object Object] and Emily Vale, Gendermancer reshared this.
Simon Zerafa
in reply to [object Object] • • •[object Object] reshared this.
/home/rqm
in reply to [object Object] • • •The big mistake Graphene seem to be making either in comms or maybe in actual conviction among leadership is to say they are selling "good code, " which they now say AI is helping them write.
But that is not the primary thing people want from them. Their main "product" is trust, and LLM use, in any way, automatically erodes that. As well as such poor handling of criticism.
They could take a leaf out of LibreOffice's book.
reshared this
[object Object] and Ozzelot reshared this.
Gryphon Myers
in reply to [object Object] • • •[object Object] reshared this.