4 ms·

Only on hackernews you get the most ironic of takes. Supposedly someone who is educated and technologically literate to a high degree, thinks opposition to AI i

Only on hackernews you get the most ironic of takes. Supposedly someone who is educated and technologically literate to a high degree, thinks opposition to AI is a good thing. Crazy world.

nerdjon 3y ago
> thinks opposition to AI is a good thing. Because we don't want nearly every job to be automated by AI? "Crazy world"
- bembo 3y ago
  Why wouldn't we want jobs to be automated exactly?
  - nerdjon 3y ago
    Well at this point in time we live in a capitalist world and people need money to survive? I assume you like being paid, buying things, food, etc. Would it be great if we lived in a utopian society that money no longer mattered. Sure! Even with AI I see basically zero chance of that happening in any reasonable amount of time before AI destroys our society.
  - vouaobrasil 3y ago
    Because if a job is automted, it means that the person whose job is automated now is unemployed. Even if we have UBI, it means that the person DOING the automating will get a disproportionate share of the resources compared with the pittance given to the person who was automated. Personally, I don't want my job to be automated. I write for a living and if AI takes my job, I won't get paid. I prefer to create value in the world that other people appreciate. I don't WANT to sit in a concrete cage (an apartment) and consume media, with no real purpose in society. Believe it or not, the majority of people in the world need to feel like they are working for something. Yes, some people will be able to find other causes (mine will be the opposition of AI), but others won't. Of course, that will mean the necessity of drugging people with media (and physical substances...why do you think marijuana is becoming legal in more places?). The end result is a mode of pure consumption for almost all except the elite who control all the production, and they will decide what happens with the world. Personally, I don't want that: I want land and autonomy to use it to grow food and preserve ecosystems. I want the world to be sustainable, and not just set up for the purpose of furthering technology. You speak of societal changes on a year-scale. I'm talking about decades and the long-term. This level of automation is bad, and won't do any favours for humanity except the ultra-rich, who will eventually perish like everyone else.
    - Wissenschafter 3y ago
      I'm always dumbfounded by the luddites on hackernews, it blows my mind.
      - pseudonamed 3y ago
        Is your position that the scenario outlined above is irrational?
        Wissenschafter 3y ago
        Yes, it is; it's as irrational as seamstresses complaining about looms.
      - vouaobrasil 3y ago
        Don't worry, I am equally dumbfounded by blind faith in technology.
    - pseudonamed 3y ago
      ...unless we change our socio-political systems. A complex endeavour but worth remembering.
      - vouaobrasil 3y ago
        Change, or revolt against them...
  - nunez 3y ago
    Because every job that gets automated creates massive unemployment for those who were skilled in it what do you think will happen to us devs if AI gets good enough to do our jobs? Do you think our companies will keep us around because we're just so darn smart? What do you think is _already happening_ to in-house artists, content/technical writers, marketing analysts, and other jobs that are directly impacted by LLMs in their current form?
    - Wissenschafter 3y ago
      I'm not a selfish asshole, just a normal asshole. Yeah, I'm going to be affected by my job also being automated, everyone will. It's not a field specific problem. It's a societal paradigm change.
      - nunez 3y ago
        This doesn't bother you? If not, how come?
- Wissenschafter 3y ago
  It's crazy you think we don't want our jobs automated away. The whole point of automation is to reduce human labor. Mind boggling people literally choose to want to have to labor even if it is no longer necessary.
  - krapp 3y ago
    >Mind boggling people literally choose to want to have to labor even if it is no longer necessary. It is necessary, it just isn't available. We still live in a capitalist society in which anyone not a member of the capitalist class is required to labor in order to afford the necessities of survival. AI means fewer opportunities to do so, despite the requirement remaining constant. No one is choosing to labor under this system, any more than one chooses to eat, drink or sleep. AI is not being implemented to free the labor class from this obligation, it is being implemented to free the capitalist class from the obligation to provide the means of survival to the labor class in exchange for their labor. The end result will not be the labor classes living lives of luxury in creative and intellectual pursuit, but as much unemployment and poverty as the market can bear.
vouaobrasil 3y ago
Actually, I believe it was my education in pure mathematics (PhD), computer programming, and technology, as well as living in three countries and seeing the word that allowed me to truly realize how damaging AI can really be. Believe it or not, I was heavily into technology when I was in my 20s. But after seeing environmental damage, reading widely in philosophy and sociology, writing about it to clarify it, I came to a different conclusion: that technology is not all it's cracked up to be, especially when it is plugged into a system of global capitalism whose ultimate aim is consumerism. Just think: one of the biggest companies in the world (Google/Alphabet) has as its primary goal to promote unsustainability. If that doesn't make you think, what will. And let me ask you this: are you so sure about technology, given that you were raised in a world that praises it like a religion? I think the fanatical religious witch hunters also thought they were right, simply because they were raised in such an environment. Loving technology is the default position of the rich. Is that just a coincidence?
- Wissenschafter 3y ago
  I'm 30, you sound older. I did my education in philosophy and physics and I'm a data engineer at a F200. I think you couldn't be more wrong, and out of touch. You sound like Kaczynsky. I love technology because it's interesting, who cares what rich people think. I can't understand this oldhead defeatist mentality a lot of people here seem to have similar to yours.
  - pseudonamed 3y ago
    "who cares what rich people think" is an astoundingly politically naive statement.
  - beeboobaa3 3y ago
    You sound incredibly naive. Good luck enjoying technology when all you get to do is manual labor to feed the machine. Everything else will be done "for us", with the rich people in charge of it all.
    - Wissenschafter 3y ago
starbugs 3y ago
> Supposedly someone who is educated and technologically literate to a high degree, thinks opposition to AI is a good thing. Ignoring that your comment is phrased in a hurtful way towards the parent which got you a downvote from me, why do you think these two are connected in any way?
lewhoo 3y ago
The level of scrutiny and plurality of opinions towards technology in general is imho what makes a tech forum good.
- Wissenschafter 3y ago
  I'm not saying it's a bad thing, it's just so unexpected that every time I see it it fascinates me.
quickslowdown 3y ago
Crazy world when any random person on the Internet just assumes everyone else thinks the way they do. Put me solidly in the camp of educated & "technologically literate to a high degree" and also in opposition of AI.
- Wissenschafter 3y ago
  The two are inherently incompatible to me. I don't understand how you can hold those positions. To me, being against AI is pretty much 'evil'. You support humans existing in a barbaric existence like animals, suffering. I support laws to criminalize people hampering it like they are doing in Japan. I literally will fight against people like you.
  - ler_ 3y ago
    Well, with AI people will still likely be suffering, except those at the top of the pyramid will be doing even better. Not so great. The AI debate is not about technology per se, but more so about seeing how gains in technology / productivity only go to the top, and extrapolating how bad that will be when greed meets the hyper-productivity of AI.
  - quickslowdown 3y ago
    I'm not going to fight you lol, and your hyperbole means nothing to me. You strut in here making assertions and assume everyone just feels the same and is going to go along. Your mentality is irresponsible and exactly the problem I have with AI.

Only on hackernews you get the most ironic of takes. Supposedly someone who is educated and technologically literate to a high degree, thinks opposition to AI is a good thing. Crazy world.

nerdjon 3y ago

> thinks opposition to AI is a good thing. Because we don't want nearly every job to be automated by AI? "Crazy world"

bembo 3y ago
Why wouldn't we want jobs to be automated exactly?
- nerdjon 3y ago
  Well at this point in time we live in a capitalist world and people need money to survive? I assume you like being paid, buying things, food, etc. Would it be great if we lived in a utopian society that money no longer mattered. Sure! Even with AI I see basically zero chance of that happening in any reasonable amount of time before AI destroys our society.
- vouaobrasil 3y ago
  Because if a job is automted, it means that the person whose job is automated now is unemployed. Even if we have UBI, it means that the person DOING the automating will get a disproportionate share of the resources compared with the pittance given to the person who was automated. Personally, I don't want my job to be automated. I write for a living and if AI takes my job, I won't get paid. I prefer to create value in the world that other people appreciate. I don't WANT to sit in a concrete cage (an apartment) and consume media, with no real purpose in society. Believe it or not, the majority of people in the world need to feel like they are working for something. Yes, some people will be able to find other causes (mine will be the opposition of AI), but others won't. Of course, that will mean the necessity of drugging people with media (and physical substances...why do you think marijuana is becoming legal in more places?). The end result is a mode of pure consumption for almost all except the elite who control all the production, and they will decide what happens with the world. Personally, I don't want that: I want land and autonomy to use it to grow food and preserve ecosystems. I want the world to be sustainable, and not just set up for the purpose of furthering technology. You speak of societal changes on a year-scale. I'm talking about decades and the long-term. This level of automation is bad, and won't do any favours for humanity except the ultra-rich, who will eventually perish like everyone else.
  - Wissenschafter 3y ago
    I'm always dumbfounded by the luddites on hackernews, it blows my mind.
    - pseudonamed 3y ago
      Is your position that the scenario outlined above is irrational?
      - Wissenschafter 3y ago
        Yes, it is; it's as irrational as seamstresses complaining about looms.
    - vouaobrasil 3y ago
      Don't worry, I am equally dumbfounded by blind faith in technology.
  - pseudonamed 3y ago
    ...unless we change our socio-political systems. A complex endeavour but worth remembering.
    - vouaobrasil 3y ago
      Change, or revolt against them...
- nunez 3y ago
  Because every job that gets automated creates massive unemployment for those who were skilled in it what do you think will happen to us devs if AI gets good enough to do our jobs? Do you think our companies will keep us around because we're just so darn smart? What do you think is _already happening_ to in-house artists, content/technical writers, marketing analysts, and other jobs that are directly impacted by LLMs in their current form?
  - Wissenschafter 3y ago
    I'm not a selfish asshole, just a normal asshole. Yeah, I'm going to be affected by my job also being automated, everyone will. It's not a field specific problem. It's a societal paradigm change.
    - nunez 3y ago
      This doesn't bother you? If not, how come?
Wissenschafter 3y ago
It's crazy you think we don't want our jobs automated away. The whole point of automation is to reduce human labor. Mind boggling people literally choose to want to have to labor even if it is no longer necessary.
- krapp 3y ago
  >Mind boggling people literally choose to want to have to labor even if it is no longer necessary. It is necessary, it just isn't available. We still live in a capitalist society in which anyone not a member of the capitalist class is required to labor in order to afford the necessities of survival. AI means fewer opportunities to do so, despite the requirement remaining constant. No one is choosing to labor under this system, any more than one chooses to eat, drink or sleep. AI is not being implemented to free the labor class from this obligation, it is being implemented to free the capitalist class from the obligation to provide the means of survival to the labor class in exchange for their labor. The end result will not be the labor classes living lives of luxury in creative and intellectual pursuit, but as much unemployment and poverty as the market can bear.

vouaobrasil 3y ago

Actually, I believe it was my education in pure mathematics (PhD), computer programming, and technology, as well as living in three countries and seeing the word that allowed me to truly realize how damaging AI can really be. Believe it or not, I was heavily into technology when I was in my 20s. But after seeing environmental damage, reading widely in philosophy and sociology, writing about it to clarify it, I came to a different conclusion: that technology is not all it's cracked up to be, especially when it is plugged into a system of global capitalism whose ultimate aim is consumerism. Just think: one of the biggest companies in the world (Google/Alphabet) has as its primary goal to promote unsustainability. If that doesn't make you think, what will. And let me ask you this: are you so sure about technology, given that you were raised in a world that praises it like a religion? I think the fanatical religious witch hunters also thought they were right, simply because they were raised in such an environment. Loving technology is the default position of the rich. Is that just a coincidence?

Wissenschafter 3y ago
I'm 30, you sound older. I did my education in philosophy and physics and I'm a data engineer at a F200. I think you couldn't be more wrong, and out of touch. You sound like Kaczynsky. I love technology because it's interesting, who cares what rich people think. I can't understand this oldhead defeatist mentality a lot of people here seem to have similar to yours.
- pseudonamed 3y ago
  "who cares what rich people think" is an astoundingly politically naive statement.
- beeboobaa3 3y ago
  You sound incredibly naive. Good luck enjoying technology when all you get to do is manual labor to feed the machine. Everything else will be done "for us", with the rich people in charge of it all.
  - Wissenschafter 3y ago

starbugs 3y ago

> Supposedly someone who is educated and technologically literate to a high degree, thinks opposition to AI is a good thing. Ignoring that your comment is phrased in a hurtful way towards the parent which got you a downvote from me, why do you think these two are connected in any way?

lewhoo 3y ago

The level of scrutiny and plurality of opinions towards technology in general is imho what makes a tech forum good.

Wissenschafter 3y ago
I'm not saying it's a bad thing, it's just so unexpected that every time I see it it fascinates me.

quickslowdown 3y ago

Crazy world when any random person on the Internet just assumes everyone else thinks the way they do. Put me solidly in the camp of educated & "technologically literate to a high degree" and also in opposition of AI.

Wissenschafter 3y ago
The two are inherently incompatible to me. I don't understand how you can hold those positions. To me, being against AI is pretty much 'evil'. You support humans existing in a barbaric existence like animals, suffering. I support laws to criminalize people hampering it like they are doing in Japan. I literally will fight against people like you.
- ler_ 3y ago
  Well, with AI people will still likely be suffering, except those at the top of the pyramid will be doing even better. Not so great. The AI debate is not about technology per se, but more so about seeing how gains in technology / productivity only go to the top, and extrapolating how bad that will be when greed meets the hyper-productivity of AI.
- quickslowdown 3y ago
  I'm not going to fight you lol, and your hyperbole means nothing to me. You strut in here making assertions and assume everyone just feels the same and is going to go along. Your mentality is irresponsible and exactly the problem I have with AI.