If I say "doing $FOO is a losing proposition", and I believe what I say, why on earth would I then move on to actually doing $FOO?
I am pointing out that there is nothing to be gained by joining this recursive race - anything you produce using LLMs I can clone using LLMs, but anything I produce using LLMs can be cloned by someone else, using LLMs.
Why would you assume that I want to insert myself into this recursively descending race to the bottom?
If cloning a product with LLMs is a losing proposition, why would anyone do it, and if nobody does it, isn't your original assertion false? Any argument relying on everyone cloning things with LLMs doesn't work if everyone doesn't clone things with LLMs.
> If cloning a product with LLMs is a losing proposition, why would anyone do it,
Because they don't yet know that it is a losing proposition?
> and if nobody does it, isn't your original assertion false?
False dichotomy, it isn't an all-or-nothing scenario like you present, it's the fact that there are enough cloners to make every race a race to the bottom in a matter of days.
> Any argument relying on everyone cloning things with LLMs doesn't work if everyone doesn't clone things with LLMs.
If I say "doing $FOO is a losing proposition", and I believe what I say, why on earth would I then move on to actually doing $FOO?
I am pointing out that there is nothing to be gained by joining this recursive race - anything you produce using LLMs I can clone using LLMs, but anything I produce using LLMs can be cloned by someone else, using LLMs.
Why would you assume that I want to insert myself into this recursively descending race to the bottom?