3 ms·

For some reason AI seems to bring out articles that seem to fundamentally lack curiosity - opting instead for gleeful mockery and scorn. I like AI, but I'll hap

by johnfn 1y ago

For some reason AI seems to bring out articles that seem to fundamentally lack curiosity - opting instead for gleeful mockery and scorn. I like AI, but I'll happily read thoughtful articles from people who disagree. But not this. This article has no value other than to dunk on the opposition. I tend to think HN's moderation is OK, but I think these sorts of low-curiosity articles need to be off the front page.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
willywutso 1y ago
[dead]
giantrobot 1y ago
> opting instead for gleeful mockery and scorn This is well earned by the likes of OpenAI that is trying to convince everyone they need trillions of dollars to build fabs to build super genius AIs. These super genius AIs will replace everyone (except billionaires) and act as magic money printers (for billionaires). Meanwhile their super genius precursor AIs make up shit and can't count letters in words while being laughably sycophantic. There's no need to defend poor innocent megacorps trying to usher in a techno-feudal dystopia.
- MBCook 1y ago
  I think there’s plenty to mock about the hype around AI That doesn’t mean any article mocking it or trashing it is well written or insightful.
- frozenseven 1y ago
  >can't count letters in words This really hasn't been a thing since reasoning models showed up. Any recent example of such seems to come from non-reasoning variants. >laughably sycophantic Mainstream models are moving away from this, afaik. Part of the recent drama is that GPT-5 wasn't sycophantic enough for some users.
  - jjani 1y ago
    https://bsky.app/profile/kjhealy.co/post/3lvtxbtexg226 https://bsky.app/profile/kjhealy.co/post/3lvtxbtexg226
    - frozenseven 1y ago
      This is exactly what I'm talking about. The immediate issue with GPT-5's launch was that some people were getting rerouted to 4o, and there was no control over which version of GPT-5 you're getting. Whatever he's talking to there looks nothing like a reasoning model.
hyperadvanced 1y ago
I don’t like AI and I think this type of article is very boring. Imagine having one of the most interesting technological developments of the last 50 years unfolding before your eyes and resort to reposting tweet fragments…
bko 1y ago
> For some reason AI seems to bring out articles that seem to fundamentally lack curiosity - opting instead for gleeful mockery and scorn I think its broader to all tech. It all started in 2016 after it was deemed that tech, especially social media, had helped sway the election. Since then a lot of things became political that weren't in the past and tech got swept up w/ that. And unfortunately AI has its haters despite the fact that it's objectively the fastest growing most exciting technology in the last 50 years. Instead they're dissecting some CEOs shitposts. Fast forward to today, pretty much everything is political. Take this banger from NY Times: > Mr. Kennedy has singled out Froot Loops as an example of a product with too many ingredients. In an interview with MSNBC on Nov. 6, he questioned the overall ingredient count: “Why do we have Froot Loops in this country that have 18 or 19 ingredients and you go to Canada and it has two or three?” Mr. Kennedy asked. > He was wrong on the ingredient count, they are roughly the same. But the Canadian version does have natural colorings made from blueberries and carrots while the U.S. product contains red dye 40, yellow 5 and blue 1 as well as Butylated hydroxytoluene, or BHT, a lab-made chemical that is used “for freshness,” according to the ingredient label. No self-awareness. https://archive.is/dT2qK#selection-975.0-996.0 https://archive.is/dT2qK#selection-975.0-996.0
- moritzwarhier 1y ago
  I think you are missing the forest for the trees here. > It all started in 2016 after it was deemed that tech, especially social media, had helped sway the election. Since then a lot of things became political that weren't in the past and tech got swept up w/ that The 2016 election was a symptom of broader societal changes, and yeah, I'd also say it exhibited a new level of psychological manipulation in election campaigns. But the election being "deemed" influenced by technology and media (sure it was, why not?) as a cause for political division seems very far-fetched. Regarding the US healthcare politics farce, I don't understand your point or how it relates to the beginning of your comment. Political division and propaganda inciting outrage are flourishing, yes. Not because of what you describe about the 2016 election though, IMO. What's the connection? So you mean if nobody had assessed social media campaigns after that election, politics wozld be more honest and fact-based? Why? And what did you want to say with the NY Times article about the US secretary of health and American junk food / cereals?
ants_everywhere 1y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- MBCook 1y ago
  So everyone who isn’t pro AI is just an astroturfer in a coordinated campaign? I find that extremely unlikely.
  - ants_everywhere 1y ago
    Do you see how you've chosen to try to twist what I've said instead of honestly engaging with it?
    - jfengel 1y ago
      That was what it sounded like to me, too. I see another comment express the same. I trust that wasn't what was intended but I'm not entirely sure what you did intend. So it's a little hard to engage with it.
      - ants_everywhere 1y ago
        Is there any single sentence in my comment that you think is factually incorrect as written? And do you not see that it's a common form of intellectual dishonesty to pretend that a "there exists" statement is a "for all" statement, and now three people have tried to do this without adding anything at all to the discussion?
        MBCook 1y ago
        You said people underestimate the amount of astroturfing. Clearly implying there is more than people think. You seemed to imply there was a small amount of genuine anti-AI posting. You then said the posts came in identifiable waves followed by explaining how people organize on discord to post such things. All of that added up sounds to me like you are implying the vast majority of anti-AI sentiment is organized astroturfing. Yeah you never said every single one, I generalized on that front. You say that’s not what you meant. Sorry, that was how I read your post. It sounded to me like a blatant dismissal of all critiques as fake or insincere.
hckrfucrs 1y ago
Ah yes, the highest form of curiosity, the kind that attempts to silence those whose opinion differs from your own. If it hurts your feelings to have your terrible opinions "dunked" on then take the time to form better opinions.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- johnfn 1y ago
  I said clearly and explicitly in my comment that I am happy to read thoughtful anti-AI material. That you disregarded this to write your comment says more about your ability to "form better opinions" than mine.
jepson19 1y ago
I think this is the fundamental trend of all "commentary" in the digital age. Thoughtful, nuanced takes simply cannot generate the same audience and velocity, and by the time you write something of actual substance the moment is gone and the hyper-narrative has moved on.

by johnfn 1y ago

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

willywutso 1y ago

[dead]

giantrobot 1y ago

> opting instead for gleeful mockery and scorn This is well earned by the likes of OpenAI that is trying to convince everyone they need trillions of dollars to build fabs to build super genius AIs. These super genius AIs will replace everyone (except billionaires) and act as magic money printers (for billionaires). Meanwhile their super genius precursor AIs make up shit and can't count letters in words while being laughably sycophantic. There's no need to defend poor innocent megacorps trying to usher in a techno-feudal dystopia.

MBCook 1y ago
I think there’s plenty to mock about the hype around AI That doesn’t mean any article mocking it or trashing it is well written or insightful.
frozenseven 1y ago
>can't count letters in words This really hasn't been a thing since reasoning models showed up. Any recent example of such seems to come from non-reasoning variants. >laughably sycophantic Mainstream models are moving away from this, afaik. Part of the recent drama is that GPT-5 wasn't sycophantic enough for some users.
- jjani 1y ago
  https://bsky.app/profile/kjhealy.co/post/3lvtxbtexg226 https://bsky.app/profile/kjhealy.co/post/3lvtxbtexg226
  - frozenseven 1y ago
    This is exactly what I'm talking about. The immediate issue with GPT-5's launch was that some people were getting rerouted to 4o, and there was no control over which version of GPT-5 you're getting. Whatever he's talking to there looks nothing like a reasoning model.

hyperadvanced 1y ago

I don’t like AI and I think this type of article is very boring. Imagine having one of the most interesting technological developments of the last 50 years unfolding before your eyes and resort to reposting tweet fragments…

bko 1y ago

> For some reason AI seems to bring out articles that seem to fundamentally lack curiosity - opting instead for gleeful mockery and scorn I think its broader to all tech. It all started in 2016 after it was deemed that tech, especially social media, had helped sway the election. Since then a lot of things became political that weren't in the past and tech got swept up w/ that. And unfortunately AI has its haters despite the fact that it's objectively the fastest growing most exciting technology in the last 50 years. Instead they're dissecting some CEOs shitposts. Fast forward to today, pretty much everything is political. Take this banger from NY Times: > Mr. Kennedy has singled out Froot Loops as an example of a product with too many ingredients. In an interview with MSNBC on Nov. 6, he questioned the overall ingredient count: “Why do we have Froot Loops in this country that have 18 or 19 ingredients and you go to Canada and it has two or three?” Mr. Kennedy asked. > He was wrong on the ingredient count, they are roughly the same. But the Canadian version does have natural colorings made from blueberries and carrots while the U.S. product contains red dye 40, yellow 5 and blue 1 as well as Butylated hydroxytoluene, or BHT, a lab-made chemical that is used “for freshness,” according to the ingredient label. No self-awareness. https://archive.is/dT2qK#selection-975.0-996.0 https://archive.is/dT2qK#selection-975.0-996.0

moritzwarhier 1y ago
I think you are missing the forest for the trees here. > It all started in 2016 after it was deemed that tech, especially social media, had helped sway the election. Since then a lot of things became political that weren't in the past and tech got swept up w/ that The 2016 election was a symptom of broader societal changes, and yeah, I'd also say it exhibited a new level of psychological manipulation in election campaigns. But the election being "deemed" influenced by technology and media (sure it was, why not?) as a cause for political division seems very far-fetched. Regarding the US healthcare politics farce, I don't understand your point or how it relates to the beginning of your comment. Political division and propaganda inciting outrage are flourishing, yes. Not because of what you describe about the 2016 election though, IMO. What's the connection? So you mean if nobody had assessed social media campaigns after that election, politics wozld be more honest and fact-based? Why? And what did you want to say with the NY Times article about the US secretary of health and American junk food / cereals?

ants_everywhere 1y ago

[flagged]

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
MBCook 1y ago
So everyone who isn’t pro AI is just an astroturfer in a coordinated campaign? I find that extremely unlikely.
- ants_everywhere 1y ago
  Do you see how you've chosen to try to twist what I've said instead of honestly engaging with it?
  - jfengel 1y ago
    That was what it sounded like to me, too. I see another comment express the same. I trust that wasn't what was intended but I'm not entirely sure what you did intend. So it's a little hard to engage with it.
    - ants_everywhere 1y ago
      Is there any single sentence in my comment that you think is factually incorrect as written? And do you not see that it's a common form of intellectual dishonesty to pretend that a "there exists" statement is a "for all" statement, and now three people have tried to do this without adding anything at all to the discussion?
      - MBCook 1y ago
        You said people underestimate the amount of astroturfing. Clearly implying there is more than people think. You seemed to imply there was a small amount of genuine anti-AI posting. You then said the posts came in identifiable waves followed by explaining how people organize on discord to post such things. All of that added up sounds to me like you are implying the vast majority of anti-AI sentiment is organized astroturfing. Yeah you never said every single one, I generalized on that front. You say that’s not what you meant. Sorry, that was how I read your post. It sounded to me like a blatant dismissal of all critiques as fake or insincere.

hckrfucrs 1y ago

Ah yes, the highest form of curiosity, the kind that attempts to silence those whose opinion differs from your own. If it hurts your feelings to have your terrible opinions "dunked" on then take the time to form better opinions.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
johnfn 1y ago
I said clearly and explicitly in my comment that I am happy to read thoughtful anti-AI material. That you disregarded this to write your comment says more about your ability to "form better opinions" than mine.

jepson19 1y ago

I think this is the fundamental trend of all "commentary" in the digital age. Thoughtful, nuanced takes simply cannot generate the same audience and velocity, and by the time you write something of actual substance the moment is gone and the hyper-narrative has moved on.