3 ms·

And the whole Adobe pdf thing and the whole Microsoft word thing. And the whole ibm pc thing. Imagine if we were forced to keep using ibm from when they lost th

And the whole Adobe pdf thing and the whole Microsoft word thing. And the whole ibm pc thing. Imagine if we were forced to keep using ibm from when they lost their way until now simply because anti-ai luddites were able to scare monger

dimitrios1 7mo ago
I would wager that the vast majority of people commenting here about the pitfalls of AI, especially as it relates to governance and laws, are heavy users of AI, recognize the import and value it brings, and find ways to utilize it more themselves, so not sure using an ad-hominem dismissal of very valid objections are going to be effective. (side bar: the phrase "anti-<whatever> luddites" is way, way overused, especially here. Let's get more creative, people!)
- MrDarcy 7mo ago
  HN comments on LLM agents are bi-modal now, as are views in the general population. The modes are adopters and non-adopters. There isn’t much of a middle ground anymore.
- fc417fc802 7mo ago
  And yet the term luddite seems to fit the anti-ai crowd perfectly. They are largely concerned about employment (and more generally economic stability) and to that end seek measures intended to protect workers. There's also some environmentalist concerns which the term luddite again fits perfectly. You just have to generalize, transferring laterally from economic wellbeing to environmental wellbeing. So I don't think GP qualified as an ad hominem dismissal but rather an accurate description of the situation. Take what's being discussed (restrictions on specifications and interoperability), project it backwards in history, and imagine what an alternate present day would look like. I think it would be pretty bad.
  - Qwertious 7mo ago
    >They are largely concerned about employment (and more generally economic stability) and to that end seek measures intended to protect workers. Pffft no. Most of us think that AI is being used as a political trick - like firing unionized workers "to replace them with AI" and then hiring new un-unionized workers to replace them, 2 weeks later. Replace the AI with an empty cardboard box labeled "AI" in black marker, and nothing changes. See also: using AI to launder pirated material, for big businesses.
    - pixl97 7mo ago
      >a political trick - like firing unionized workers 1. Since when have companies needed trillions of dollars of AI to do that? In the US they've been able to get away with getting rid of unions for decades now. 2. Since when has HN given a shit about unions. Posting about unions, at least till recently has been a great way of getting your comment downvoted to [dead] in one easy step. For longer than LLMs have existed the HN answer to unions was "They are just there to keep me as an SWE from making as much money as I can". Only now do we see a little bit of pushback now that their heads may be next on the chopping block.
  - pyrale 7mo ago
    > and more generally economic stability Who doesn't enjoy interesting times™
- aaron695 7mo ago
  [dead]

dimitrios1 7mo ago

I would wager that the vast majority of people commenting here about the pitfalls of AI, especially as it relates to governance and laws, are heavy users of AI, recognize the import and value it brings, and find ways to utilize it more themselves, so not sure using an ad-hominem dismissal of very valid objections are going to be effective. (side bar: the phrase "anti-<whatever> luddites" is way, way overused, especially here. Let's get more creative, people!)

MrDarcy 7mo ago
HN comments on LLM agents are bi-modal now, as are views in the general population. The modes are adopters and non-adopters. There isn’t much of a middle ground anymore.
fc417fc802 7mo ago
And yet the term luddite seems to fit the anti-ai crowd perfectly. They are largely concerned about employment (and more generally economic stability) and to that end seek measures intended to protect workers. There's also some environmentalist concerns which the term luddite again fits perfectly. You just have to generalize, transferring laterally from economic wellbeing to environmental wellbeing. So I don't think GP qualified as an ad hominem dismissal but rather an accurate description of the situation. Take what's being discussed (restrictions on specifications and interoperability), project it backwards in history, and imagine what an alternate present day would look like. I think it would be pretty bad.
- Qwertious 7mo ago
  >They are largely concerned about employment (and more generally economic stability) and to that end seek measures intended to protect workers. Pffft no. Most of us think that AI is being used as a political trick - like firing unionized workers "to replace them with AI" and then hiring new un-unionized workers to replace them, 2 weeks later. Replace the AI with an empty cardboard box labeled "AI" in black marker, and nothing changes. See also: using AI to launder pirated material, for big businesses.
  - pixl97 7mo ago
    >a political trick - like firing unionized workers 1. Since when have companies needed trillions of dollars of AI to do that? In the US they've been able to get away with getting rid of unions for decades now. 2. Since when has HN given a shit about unions. Posting about unions, at least till recently has been a great way of getting your comment downvoted to [dead] in one easy step. For longer than LLMs have existed the HN answer to unions was "They are just there to keep me as an SWE from making as much money as I can". Only now do we see a little bit of pushback now that their heads may be next on the chopping block.
- pyrale 7mo ago
  > and more generally economic stability Who doesn't enjoy interesting times™
aaron695 7mo ago
[dead]