3 ms·
> The article itself is clueless… it doesn’t engage authors’ concerns at all, and just portrays authors as stoopid AI-fearful luddites. Going off of some of th
by macNchz 3y ago
> The article itself is clueless… it doesn’t engage authors’ concerns at all, and just portrays authors as stoopid AI-fearful luddites.
Going off of some of the tweets about this that initially whipped up the outrage about this…it’s not like they were making a nuanced case about their concerns, they were basically just stomping their feet and shouting.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jmull 3y agoThat's twitter generally. If your engagement only reaches the level of twitter, you aren't really engaging at all.
- dnissley 3y agoSo as long as that's all the engagement there is, we're free to ignore it and carry on, correct?
- ineedasername 3y agoI would think so. If someone is shouting & stomping their feet in the public town square about my project, but I never go anywhere near the town square anyway, I don’t think I’m going to shutdown my project. It’s just too bad the person who created this tool happened to walk through the town square.
- jmull 3y agoI think you're fishing for a way to dismiss the concerns of the authors without understanding or addressing them, which is pointless.