I’ve come round to the idea that I will not use LLMs regardless of how “ethically” they can be sourced because their outputs are harmful in a way that builds up, like a very small dose of poison.

How is LLM output any more harmful than output from a human you don't know? I would agree with you if one were to simply blindly accept anything an LLM gives you as factual. However, I am skeptical of what humans say too. Some are inaccurate out of carelessness, some out of malice. Critical thinking is the key to protection from both errand LLM output and fallible humans.

Additionally, this thread is about locally running LLMs. One of the most dangerous aspects of most large LLMs is the sycophancy where the LLM will try to tell you what you want to hear, even if it needs to creatively invent things that don't exist or are not true. If you are not aware, running locally means you have all the controls on the model. You're not subject to whatever settings a large hyperscaler sets up for you. This means, among other things, you can turn down the "temperature" setting, which is the lever that controls how creative an LLM is. Practically what this means is, if you set it to "0" you are allowing it no creative action. If you ask it a question it doesn't have actual training on, it will tell you effectively "I don't know" instead of making something up just to have an answer.

It might seem like a romantic or artist’s approach, but with so much spiralling out of our control I’m trying to make the active choice to be more human.

The older I get the more disappointed I get in humanities large group decisions and actions.