L'enfer néolibéral ne connaît pas de fin...
October 22, 2025 at 4:51 PM
L'enfer néolibéral ne connaît pas de fin...
The French government was not in exile at all. Never. The French government was never in exile. It was very much there.
August 29, 2025 at 11:06 PM
The French government was not in exile at all. Never. The French government was never in exile. It was very much there.
The Greens are a parliamentary group, not a sociological community. What they vote on has a concrete political impact.
Bye.
Bye.
August 4, 2025 at 8:17 PM
The Greens are a parliamentary group, not a sociological community. What they vote on has a concrete political impact.
Bye.
Bye.
Take off your little antifascist badge if you support EU.
August 4, 2025 at 7:18 PM
Take off your little antifascist badge if you support EU.
If you think naming potential use equals liberation, we’re not in the same conversation.
Bye.
Bye.
June 16, 2025 at 8:38 PM
If you think naming potential use equals liberation, we’re not in the same conversation.
Bye.
Bye.
You’re not wrong that people will always find cracks to speak through. But that is not a feature of the tool. That is a testament to human resilience.
June 16, 2025 at 8:38 PM
You’re not wrong that people will always find cracks to speak through. But that is not a feature of the tool. That is a testament to human resilience.
This technology is trained on unconsented data, built on extractive labor, embedded in centralized systems, and shaped by corporate logic. Using it “against” the system often just feeds it new data, new forms, new edge cases to neutralize.
June 16, 2025 at 8:38 PM
This technology is trained on unconsented data, built on extractive labor, embedded in centralized systems, and shaped by corporate logic. Using it “against” the system often just feeds it new data, new forms, new edge cases to neutralize.
You’re confusing potential with structuree. The fact that a tool can be used to produce subversive knowledge does not mean it was designed for that, or that it supports it.
June 16, 2025 at 8:38 PM
You’re confusing potential with structuree. The fact that a tool can be used to produce subversive knowledge does not mean it was designed for that, or that it supports it.
You can’t separate a tool from the infrastructure, labor, extraction, and epistemicide that make it possible.
Usefulness is not neutral. It reflects what the system rewards, what it makes legible, and what it demands from those forced to live under it.
Usefulness is not neutral. It reflects what the system rewards, what it makes legible, and what it demands from those forced to live under it.
June 16, 2025 at 8:35 PM
You can’t separate a tool from the infrastructure, labor, extraction, and epistemicide that make it possible.
Usefulness is not neutral. It reflects what the system rewards, what it makes legible, and what it demands from those forced to live under it.
Usefulness is not neutral. It reflects what the system rewards, what it makes legible, and what it demands from those forced to live under it.
Wanting to tear it all down while clinging to the usefulness of LLMs is like calling for abolition while defending predictive policing because it helps plan public transport.
June 16, 2025 at 8:35 PM
Wanting to tear it all down while clinging to the usefulness of LLMs is like calling for abolition while defending predictive policing because it helps plan public transport.
So, if, your defense is that people resist anyway, you’re describing survival. Not freedom.
June 16, 2025 at 8:33 PM
So, if, your defense is that people resist anyway, you’re describing survival. Not freedom.
And yeah, people have always used the tools of colonialism to resist. That doesn’t make the tools neutral. It proves how resilient oppressed communities are in hostile systems. Resistance through the master's tools is often necessary, but never liberating on its own.
June 16, 2025 at 8:33 PM
And yeah, people have always used the tools of colonialism to resist. That doesn’t make the tools neutral. It proves how resilient oppressed communities are in hostile systems. Resistance through the master's tools is often necessary, but never liberating on its own.
You’re still missing the point. Saying LLMs flatten thought is not the same as saying marginalized people lose all capacity to think. It means the tools they are increasingly pushed to use are structured to filter, erase, and reshape their language in ways that align with dominant norms.
June 16, 2025 at 8:33 PM
You’re still missing the point. Saying LLMs flatten thought is not the same as saying marginalized people lose all capacity to think. It means the tools they are increasingly pushed to use are structured to filter, erase, and reshape their language in ways that align with dominant norms.
What matters is not what is technically possible. What matters is what is materially accessible and under what conditions. That is the real terrain of power.
June 16, 2025 at 8:31 PM
What matters is not what is technically possible. What matters is what is materially accessible and under what conditions. That is the real terrain of power.
The fact that a privileged minority can modify these systems does not make them open. It makes them selectively porous in ways that still serve capital accumulation and intellectual enclosure.
June 16, 2025 at 8:31 PM
The fact that a privileged minority can modify these systems does not make them open. It makes them selectively porous in ways that still serve capital accumulation and intellectual enclosure.
Oui, some people can. But that is not general access. Training or fine-tuning an LLM requires compute, infrastructure, and expertise that remain concentrated in elite institutions, corporations, and a narrow technical class.
June 16, 2025 at 8:31 PM
Oui, some people can. But that is not general access. Training or fine-tuning an LLM requires compute, infrastructure, and expertise that remain concentrated in elite institutions, corporations, and a narrow technical class.
You do not resist power simply by using the master's tools.You resist by confronting the conditions that made those tools necessary, by refusing the framing, and by building outside it.
June 16, 2025 at 8:28 PM
You do not resist power simply by using the master's tools.You resist by confronting the conditions that made those tools necessary, by refusing the framing, and by building outside it.
Saying knowledge and power are inseparable is not an excuse to ignore how much of today’s “resistance” is preformattted, captured, and recycled through tools built to neutralize it.
June 16, 2025 at 8:28 PM
Saying knowledge and power are inseparable is not an excuse to ignore how much of today’s “resistance” is preformattted, captured, and recycled through tools built to neutralize it.
Yes, dictionaries reflect dominant ideology. The point is not that they cannot be used. It is that their form encodes hierarchies, exclusions, and norms born of specific histories of power.
June 16, 2025 at 8:28 PM
Yes, dictionaries reflect dominant ideology. The point is not that they cannot be used. It is that their form encodes hierarchies, exclusions, and norms born of specific histories of power.
Claiming it's all about how we use it erases the material conditions and structural violence embedded in the tool itself. That is not nuance. That is liberalism pretending to be realism.
June 16, 2025 at 8:27 PM
Claiming it's all about how we use it erases the material conditions and structural violence embedded in the tool itself. That is not nuance. That is liberalism pretending to be realism.
Yes, people can resist and repurpose. But resistance does not prove neutrality. It proves that people are creative even under constraint. The model remains designed to serve corporate interests, to filter language, to prioritize what isprofitable and palatable to power.
June 16, 2025 at 8:27 PM
Yes, people can resist and repurpose. But resistance does not prove neutrality. It proves that people are creative even under constraint. The model remains designed to serve corporate interests, to filter language, to prioritize what isprofitable and palatable to power.
Saying it depends how you use it assumes technology is neutral. It is not. LLMs are built, trained, and deployed within structures shaped by capital, surveillance, and ideological control.
June 16, 2025 at 8:27 PM
Saying it depends how you use it assumes technology is neutral. It is not. LLMs are built, trained, and deployed within structures shaped by capital, surveillance, and ideological control.
It's the grammar that gives those other drives form and coherence within the current system. So when people say "it's about profit," they may not be saying everything, but they're pointing in the right direction.
June 16, 2025 at 4:14 PM
It's the grammar that gives those other drives form and coherence within the current system. So when people say "it's about profit," they may not be saying everything, but they're pointing in the right direction.