Technology

If you mean from an energy/climate/water/resource consumption perspective, then no. But of you're looking at it from a labor perspective, then also no. From a copyrights perspective? Nope as well. Okay, but surely from a correctness perspective? Very clear no. Okay, but there's still the aspect of showing recipients respect and not wasting their time by giving them something to read/view/process that you didn't care to write/think through yourself in the first place? Well, you guessed it, hard no as well.

The things that AI was made for are:

• finding a use for superfluous Blockchain GPUs when that hype began to die (initially), and more importantly...
• replacing human workers who demand nasty things like wages and vacation and sick days and rights, in order to redistribute wealth to the wealthiest.

In the same way as people can be okay or not with eating meat, I think it comes down to individual values.

LLMs have consequences to climate, labour, and (if you don’t disclose in some situations) how others perceive your creativity.

For me, I would have no problem asking and AI agent to speak to a colleagues AI agent to automatically find a mutually acceptable time for a call or meeting.

I would not use AI to compose a best man’s toast or funeral eulogy from scratch.

The quote about “I want AI to do my dishes and laundry so I have time for more creativity, I don’t want AI to do my creativity so I have more time to do dishes and laundry” applies to me.

Like, vegan "nothing with a face!" ethically? No. Absolutely not.

Vegetarian "I eat eggs and dairy?" Sure.

I think you can if you do not involve it in creating something.

For example, giving it a document and asking it questions about it.

I'm unsure that using complicated algebra to regurgitate parts of people's works is different from just copying it. Perhaps you could say a human brain learning how to code is just regurgitating the code it's had as an input before, but intuition says directly copying is somehow different.

I add copyleft licenses to code to ensure the code cannot be legally copied into proprietary software, for moral beliefs. If the output of a LLM was free software and copyleft (as would be the input) then perhaps that would be fine. Github probably has some complicated legalese that says by uploading it you permit them to use it for LLMs - I'd want that to be legally voided.