8 ms·
AI Resistance: some recent anti-AI stuff that’s worth discussing
- pmarreck 7mo agoSo is vaccine resistance. Doesn't mean it's correct, or empirically-based.
- Terr_ 7mo agoSo ultra-literally that is true, "resistance" does not mean "reasonable resistance", but I reject your subtext: It's a terrible comparison. We've had literal generations of experience with vaccines, tons of data with formal systems to collect it, and most of the "resistance" traces back to "I dun wanna" and hearsay. In contrast, LLM prompt-injection is an empirically proven issue, along with other problems like wrongful correlations (both conventional ones like racism and inexplicable ones), self-bias among models, and humans generally deploying them in very irresponsible ways.
- jrflo 7mo agoSeems a bit counterproductive if you're concerned about the environmental impact of AI to trick hyperscalers into burning more compute
- dgan 7mo agoI am don't have an opinion on the efficacity of such poisoning, but your comment is about as useful as "when being violently attacked, do not resist, as you only make yourself suffer for longer"
- sov 7mo agomaybe, but they're burning the compute regardless. it seems ostensibly likely that reducing the ROI for compute burnt will cause less compute to be burnt long term
- fuddle 7mo ago> The poison fountain itself is hosted on rnsaffn.com Would the scrapers not just add these sites to do not crawl list?
- Jtarii 7mo agoAlso aren't models like Mythos capable of checking for poison data on their own at this point?
- cute_boi 7mo agoAnd someone will come up with service anti-anti-ai.dev which will charge money to labs to filter out these sites.
- ErroneousBosh 7mo agoCool so if you do that they just won't scrape your site?
- chongli 7mo agoI assume the poisoner community is mirroring and likely remixing the content from there. The whole effort isn’t going to work with a single point of failure like that.
- guywithahat 7mo agoI'm very skeptical of his premise. I feel like AI acceptance/resistance is dependent on what social media site you use. I believe it's antagonistic on Reddit, but sites like X are generally pretty excited for AI. Certainly in my life people are accepting and excited for AI releases and tools, maybe so long as your experience with AI isn't Microsoft enterprise copilot.
- happygoose 7mo agoWhat's co-pilot? do you mean the Microsoft 365 Copilot App?
- yodsanklai 7mo agoI wonder if people who weren't very good at school feel vindicated by AI, while the most successful ones are threatened.
- xg15 7mo agoBoth can be true at the same time. You can both use AI productively yourself and be concerned/horrified of the larger direction of the technology or the actors that drive it forward.
- slibhb 7mo agoThe "Everybody Loves Raymond" bit isn't "misinformation," it's a Norm Macdonald joke. I find it kind of sad that people are spending time and energy on this. It seems like something depressed people would do. But free country and all that
- kirubakaran 7mo agoCitation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0XOz78yVmg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0XOz78yVmg
- what 7mo agoIsn’t it the last comment in the chain that is being referenced? About Idris Elba playing the mother and that he did such a good job no one noticed?
- damnesian 7mo agoThanks to this lovely site, and my distaste for AI, I've found a whole ecosystem of minimalist blogs and artists' personal sites. It's shifting my habits and foci. I don't do socials anymore except forums like this. Maybe I have slop to thank for it.
- tptacek 7mo agoI'm glad this person found community, but I think they've been a bit starstruck by concentrated interest. At no point in the next 30 years will there not be an active community of people who "loathe" AI and work to obstruct it. There are those people about smart phones, the Internet itself, even television. Meanwhile: the ability to poison models, if it can be made to work reliably, is a genuinely interesting CS question. I'm the last person in the world to build community with anti-AI activists, but I'm as interested as anybody in attacks on them! They should keep that up, and I think you'll see threads about plausible and interesting attacks are well read, including by people who don't line up with the underlying cause.
- orbital-decay 7mo agoSEO has happily mutated into LLM training and agentic search optimization, if that's what you're wondering.
- izend 7mo agoI would bet Chinese models will be much harder to poison and the fact the Chinese populace is much more pro-AI than the West.
- tptacek 7mo agoI hope not! It's a less interesting world if there aren't viable attacks!
- Jeff_Brown 7mo agoWhat an alien preference ordering.
- subw00f 7mo agoCheck the title of this website.
- godelski 7mo ago> the fact the Chinese populace is much more pro-AI than the West. Is it? Honest question. Frankly the answer smells off. Similar to thinking US sentiment about AI is accurately reflected by people in Silicon Valley. Feels like we're getting biased views.
- jonathanstrange 7mo agoThis is a normal reaction to ground breaking technology but these reactions never had any noteworthy effect in history. There used to be Maschinenstürmer during the 19th Century industrial revolution. There were also violent enemies of cars in the beginning of the 20th Century, some of them were even willing to kill drivers with lethal wire traps.
- GolfPopper 7mo agoI see a vast financial sector bubble, a flood of broken software at work, users who have incorrect expectations because they believed LLM summmaries, and a vast increase in bullshit everywhere in the public sphere; I am not seeing see the "groundbreaking technology" here. "Cheap bullshit at scale" isn't an advance, it's a disaster. Sure, LLMs are "revolutionary". So were the Chicxulub impactor and the Toba supervolcano.
- jonathanstrange 7mo agoWhen I said "groundbreaking" I only meant it as "being perceived as groundbreaking." If it isn't perceived as a disruptive technology, then it won't spark widespread protests. People protest against it because they believe it will take their jobs away, not because they believe it's a harmless fad or a financial bubble.
- runarberg 7mo agoThe comparison to cars is apt given how destructive this technology has been to cities, and how dangerous it is to drivers and non-drivers alike. But otherwise you are wrong. There has been plenty of successful resistance to technology. For example a many cities, regions, and even entire countries are nuclear free zones, where a local population successfully resisted nuclear technology. Most countries have very strict cloning regulation, to the extent that human cloning is practically unheard of despite the technology existing. And even GMO food is very limited in most countries because people have successfully resisted the technology. Neither do I think it is normal for people to resist ground breaking technology. The internet was not resisted, neither the digital computer, not calculators. There was some resistance against telephones in some countries, but that was usually around whether to prioritize infrastructure for a competing technology like wireless telegraph. AI is different. People genuinely hate this technology, and they have a good reason to, and they may be successful in fighting it off.
- madamelic 7mo agoI do understand people's dislike / hatred for AI but I am equally baffled. I feel like the same people that shout "Capitalism sucks, free us from our labor" are the exact same types that hate AI. The exact machine that will free you from your labor, when harnessed correctly, is the exact thing you hate. The "cyber psychosis" thing is overblown just like the "Tesla ignites its passengers" is. The only reason it gets in the news is because it is trendy to do so. The people getting 'infected' would've infected themselves regardless. Genuinely I think the hatred is overblown by people who have no clue what the actual truth of AI is, something they seem obsessed with. The only genuine complaint about AI is the data sourcing which is a problem being resolved by CloudFlare along with other platforms that require high payment for the privilege. With that said though, those platforms are still selling user data with users producing the content gaining nothing, that part needs to be fixed.
- Mordisquitos 7mo ago> The same people that shout "Capitalism sucks, free us from our labor" are the exact same types that hate AI. The exact machine that will free you from your labor, when harnessed correctly, is the exact thing you hate. What is your source on them being "the exact same types"?
- madamelic 7mo agoYou are right. I overstepped. I changed it to "I feel". I have Claude working on a script to validate or disprove my hypothesis. Thanks for the call-out!
- altruios 7mo agoNot exactly the same types. It is a large subsection, but a subsection, that both rally against capitalism and AI. I haven't found people of the '1$$$% capitalism great' people to hate AI... which I do find ironic: but most things tend to fall into irony on that side of the spectrum, so I don't find it surprising.
- Groxx 7mo ago>The exact machine that will free you from your labor, when harnessed correctly, is the exact thing you hate. I don't think it's all that complex tbh. The freeing from labor, both in the past and now, has been achieved largely by firing people, abandoning them to starve while power concentrates in the already-powerful. This is the exact same thing the Luddites were taking issue with. Because they partly succeeded, we have better labor laws today.
- Aboutplants 7mo agoMaybe when the entire marketing of AI is fear mongering and doom (all your jobs are going away!) the end result is something you should have expected from the very beginning
- mjtk 7mo agoAI scares the crap out of me. I worried about what reality will look like in 2-5 years. The rate of change is pretty bonkers.
- IAmGraydon 7mo agoWhat has changed for you in your life?
- mine_boi 7mo ago[flagged]
- mine_boi 7mo ago[flagged]
- larodi 7mo agoThis whole poisoning intent is so incredibly misappropriated, that I feel sad about it. First of all - there is enough content to train on already, that is not poisoned, and second - the other new content is largely populated in automated manner from the real world, and by workers in large shops in Africa, that are being paid to not produce shit. So yes, you can pollute the good old internet even more, but no, you cannot change the arrow of time, and then there's already the growing New Internet of APIs and public announce federations where this all matters very little.
- james2doyle 7mo agoYou should check out "model collapse". It seems that an abundance of content, that is more and more AI generated these days, may not be a viable option. There is also a vast amount of data that is increasingly going private or behind paywalls
- gruez 7mo ago>You should check out "model collapse". It seems that an abundance of content, that is more and more AI generated these days, may not be a viable option. Doom-saying about "model collapse" is kind of funny when OpenAI and Anthropic are mad at Chinese model makers for "distilling" their models, ie. using their outputs to train their own models.
- quikoa 7mo agoIsn't there a difference between: distilling specific AI input/output vs scraping whatever random AI output (with unknown input)?
- HWR_14 7mo agoTotally different use cases. If you have nothing, getting 90% of a SOTA model is very valuable. If you have a SOTA model, it's just a worse model.
- platinumrad 7mo agoPeople love harping on this one, but model collapse hasn't turned out to be an issue in practice.
- MisterTea 7mo agoMy take on AI is that it's a corporate tool used to extract more work from employees while tricking them into thinking they are turbo-charged devs. These days the tech industry is more moneyed circus than serious effort to improve humanity.
- paganel 7mo ago> into thinking they are turbo-charged devs Fortunately no-one sane enough among us, computer programmers, believes in that bs, we all see this masquerade for what it mostly is, basically a money grab.
- alyxya 7mo agoThis seems like a wasted effort when AI will primarily learn the majority consensus view and not one-off misinformation. AI tries to learn pattern matching for generalization, so garbage data doesn't make AI learn the wrong patterns, at best just slows down learning the actual patterns. When most compute for training is spent on curated data and RL rather than random web-scraped data, the impact is likely negligible.
- righthand 7mo agoWhat is the pattern for truth if I flood your data with lies?
- Jtarii 7mo agoThe same way humans deal with it, check it against multiple reputable sources.
- righthand 7mo agoSome of the reputable sources are taking flood of the lies for possible truth. Now what?
- chongli 7mo agoWe already learned how to defeat this from SEO spammers and citation farmers: by building networks that cross reference and corroborate one another’s fake stories. We’re already at a point where much of the academic research you find in online databases can’t be trusted without vetting through real world trustworthy institutions and experts in relevant fields. How is an LLM supposed to do this kind of vetting without the help of human curators? If all the LLM training teams have to stop indiscriminate crawling and fall back to human curation and data labeling then the poisoners will have won.
- alfiedotwtf 7mo agoIn the pre-AI-collapse era, we called this PageRank ;)
- 7mo ago
- zoogeny 7mo agoI often question my own bias on this because in my interactions with local non-tech people, the adoption of AI has pretty much affected everyone I know and it is by my estimation a majority positive reaction. I live in a fairly rural part of the PNW. So when I read "People hate what AI is doing to our world." it honestly feels like either I am completely deluded or the author is. It feels like a high school bully saying "No one here likes you" to try to gaslight his victim. I mean, obviously there are many vocal opponents to AI, I see them on social media including here on HN. And I hear some trepidation in person as well. But almost everyone I know, from trades-people to teachers, are adopting AI in some capacity and report positive uses and interactions.
- alfalfasprout 7mo agoFascinating, because I've seen the exact opposite across the PNW.
- zoogeny 7mo agoThat is why I question my own bias. One possible explanation is that I am AI positive. So when people test out "What do you think about AI?" my own responses are generally positive. That probably filters out people who don't want to argue or contradict. This kind of effect would work both ways. People who are non-confrontational in general will choose to keep quiet if their opinions differ. In this view, both pro-AI and anti-AI sides might find themselves having their bias confirmed due to opposing views self-silencing to avoid conflict.
- jolt42 7mo agoAnecdotally, I was just there and ran into a couple of anti-AI people and it's not like I was bringing it up. All I got was they were worried about the water and the heat produced. I wonder if someone has done an analysis of old-search vs AI-search, I most definitely get the info quicker that I want with AI, does that make up for the LLM cost, I have no idea.
- xg15 7mo ago> teachers Given all the borderline apocalyptic articles how students are using it to cheat and teachers have no way to stop them, I'd be honestly surprised by that.
- simianwords 7mo agoIs this just Luddism in 21st century? I kind of feel bad for the pathetic (mental) state one must be in to take this kind of activism seriously
- platevoltage 7mo agoI still maintain that the biggest proponents for this tech are unable to set up a wifi router without help.
- simianwords 7mo agoI don't think it is because the biggest proponents are at the top - either in Science / Academia / Professional software development. But even if the people who are the weakest advocate for the tech, whats the issue?
- orbital-decay 7mo agoLuddites were opposing the owners, not the tech.
- simianwords 7mo agoWho is this author opposing, pray tell me
- sunrunner 7mo agoI'd say it's still the owners, even if they don't explicitly say or if it's even consciously recognised. I doubt that the tool, put towards broadly positive uses that are considered beneficial and not harmful to individuals or society, would be seen in the same way. Most fears of AI (in the 2026 sense of the term), and perhaps technology more broadly, are fears of capitalism, ownership, and control, and less about the capabilities of the thing itself.
- Jtarii 7mo agoI think AI is super cool and use it everyday, I also think its likely to cause extreme human suffering. If AGI is let loose on the world I am confident millions of people are going to die.
- roschdal 7mo agoI resist AI.
- pj_mukh 7mo agoFortunately, the slop you visibly see online is just the tip of the iceberg. I would guess 80% of AI's real usage hides beneath the surface in back-office documentation consumption, software development, process optimization and automation, investments in new endeavors companies would've never thought possible/financially feasible etc. All of that usage is hidden from this resistance, and possible now with current models (so all this new poisoning is irrelevant). The valuations could go away tomorrow, and it would've still fundamentally changed the nature of the economy. It doesn't matter that you don't like the slop on the LinkedIn post, ban it. I think the visible slop on our various feeds that is driving people mad is a rounding error for the AI companies. Moreover, it's more a function of the attention economy than the AI economy and it should've been regulated to all holy hell back in 2015 when the enshittification began. Now is as good as time as any.
- cmdk 7mo ago[flagged]
- lpcvoid 7mo agoGood, every little bit counts. Poison them data wells.
- jmmcd 7mo ago> Since these companies can’t improve their AI models without fresh data created by human beings Totally wrong. Self-play dates back to Arthur Samuel in the 1950s and RL with verifiable rewards is a key part of training the most advanced models today.
- cubefox 7mo agoCurrent models don't yet use RLVR with self-play though, at least as far as we know. They use RLVR with large numbers of manually created RL environments. But they will probably use self-play soon. See https://www.amplifypartners.com/blog-posts/self-play-and-autocurricula-in-the-age-of-agents https://www.amplifypartners.com/blog-posts/self-play-and-aut...
- rdedev 7mo agoNot totally wrong. Self play works well with if your problem can be easily simulated in an RL environment where the model can easily explore different states. RLHF or similar techniques is not that since we don't have exactly have a simulation environment for language modelling Right now there are companies which hire software devs or data scientists to just solve a bunch of random problems so that they can generate training data for an LLM model. Why would they be in business if self play can work out so well?
- vidarh 7mo ago> Why would they be in business if self play can work out so well? Because it is still cheaper.
- notpachet 7mo ago> Right now there are companies which hire software devs or data scientists to just solve a bunch of random problems so that they can generate training data for an LLM model. Sounds like Macrodata Refinement.
- morning-coffee 7mo agoThis is (yet another reason) why we can't have nice things on the Internet anymore. Sigh.
- lolcatzlulz 7mo agoThe easiest way to grow AI resistance is to get Dario Amodei and Sam Altman on TV and let them talk.
- FeteCommuniste 7mo agoGet Alex Karp out there promoting autonomous weapons, too, if you want the ultimate trifecta.
- DoctorOetker 7mo ago[dead]
- xpe 7mo ago> The easiest way to grow AI resistance is to get Dario Amodei and Sam Altman on TV and let them talk. Tell me more? I'm guessing you might say: neither connects with everyday people, they have misaligned incentives*, they (like most corporate leaders) don't speak directly, they have more power than almost any elected leader in the world, ... Did I miss anything? My take: when it comes to character and goals and therefore predicting what they will do: please don't lump Amodei with Altman. In brief: Altman is polished, effective, and therefore rather unsettling. In short, Altman feels amoral. It feels like people follow him rather than his ideas. Amodei is different. He inspires by his character and ideals. Amodei is a well-meaning geek, and I sometimes marvel (in a good way) how he leads a top AI lab. His media chops are middling and awkward, but frankly, I'm ok with it. I get the sense he is communicating (more-or-less) as himself. Let me know if anyone here has evidence to suggest any claim I'm making is off-base. I'm no oracle. I could easily pile on more criticisms of both. Here's a few: to my eye, Dario doesn't go far enough with his concerns about AI futures, but I can't tell how much of this is his PR stance as head of A\ versus his core beliefs. Altman is a harder nut to crack: my first approximation of him is "brilliant, capable, and manipulative". As much as I worry about OpenAI and dislike Altman's power-grab, I probably grant that he's, like most people, fundamentally trying to do the right thing. I don't think he's quite as deranged as say Thiel. But I could be wrong. If I had that kind of money, intellect, and network, maybe I would also be using it aggressively and in ways that could come across as cunning. Maybe Altman and Thiel have good intentions and decent plans -- but the fact remains the concentration of power is corrupting, and they seem to have limited guardrails given their immense influence. * Here's my claim, and I invite serious debate on it: Dario, more than any corporate leader, takes alignment seriously. He actually funds work on it. He knows how it works. He cares. He actually does some of the work, or at least used to. How many CEOs of the companies they run actually have the skills to DO the rank-and-file work? Even the most pessimistic people probably probably can grant this.
- cesarvarela 7mo agoI wonder if this will have the opposite effect and produce something similar to antibiotic resistance, making Ais better at handling "poison."
- miltonlost 7mo agoConflating “kicking over ai delivery bots” and “throwing a Molotov cocktail at Altman’s house” as being both condemnable hasn’t actually been forced off the sidewalk by one of these delivery bots. These are dangerous and anti-human ADA nightmares. They shouldn’t be allowed on sidewalks, emphasis on walk
- cortesoft 7mo agoI am hoping at some point we can move towards having more nuanced conversations about AI and the role it should play in our world. It seems like currently the only two camps are at either extreme. Isn't there somewhere between removing AI from the world entirely and just sitting back and letting it take over everything? I want to talk about responsible AI use, and how to mitigate the effects on society, and to account for energy consumption, etc.
- sidrag22 7mo agokinda surprised to see this type of take out of someone who participates on this website. I feel like this is the place where I have seen that middle ground surface the most. Just the overall shift in the past year from semi handwaving to feeling like it must be embraced, and identifying the problems it creates and how to address them. I feel this is all exactly what you are mentioning. I think AI as a proper utilized tool, is amazing, I think our lack of restraint when just throwing it into everyone's hands without understanding of the tools they are using, is horrifying. I'd imagine a lot of the community here echos that same sentiment, but maybe not, and i am just making assumptions.
- cortesoft 7mo agoThe overall sentiment on here might be in the middle, but I feel like that is more because half the posts and comments are railing against AI slop and half are about exciting new AI models or tools.
- sesm 7mo agoVenture capital bet on AI taking over the world, so any conservative usage of LLMs will not get funding in the near future. The subtle reason is that betting on conservative usage of LLMs sends a signal that de-values their primary investments.
- skyberrys 7mo agoThis is my take too. When we were imagining AI what were the use cases we had in mind back then? They are these grand visions of AI will take care of major problems. We should be pushing for responsible AI deployment, starting on low risk areas and moving up to more serious uses once we know the tools work for less catastrophic situations.
- haberman 7mo agoI'm old enough to remember a time when the primary hacker cause was DRM, the DMCA, patent trolls, export controls for PGP, etc. All things that made it difficult to use information when you want to. "Information wants to be free." It's wild to see the about face. Now it's: > If [companies] can’t source training data ethically, then I see absolutely no reason why any website operator should make it easy for them to steal it. It would have been very difficult to predict this shift 25 years ago.
- noosphr 7mo agoThis is what happens when a culture doesn't have robust exclusionary mechanisms for people who want to burn it down. We welcomed the vampires in and wonder why our necks hurt.
- ryandrake 7mo agoThis is like saying Winner Take All Capitalism doesn't have an exclusionary mechanism for the rich. The system exists for the sole purpose of serving the already-rich. The vampires are an inevitability baked into the system from the start.
- noosphr 7mo ago[flagged]
- jordanb 7mo agoDisney is all-in on AI. They are thrilled. The folks fighting perpetual copyright were not fighting to make it possible for Disney to fire creatives. In fact they were fighting for the creatives to triumph over Disney.
- noosphr 7mo agoDisney is all in because all their characters are entering the public domain over the next 5 years. They can't fight like it's 1998 because youtube is now worth more than they are. > In fact they were fighting for the creatives to triumph over Disney. We were doing nothing of the sort. It was "Information wants to be free" not "we want to provide a perpetual job for a subset white collar workers". sprinkles holy water
- caesil 7mo agoThe only thing more cringe than the seething anger in this blog is the technical illiteracy revealed by an earnest belief that any of these attempts at "poisoning" will have any negative impact whatsoever on model training.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- i_love_retros 7mo agoLol I find the opposite to be cringe to be honest: people using chatgpt to write messages, emails, resumes for them, professional software developers vibe coding entire apps, talking about AGI coming from LLMs. Please. That is the cringe.
- sombragris 7mo agoI wish I could have 1K upvotes for this.
- BeetleB 7mo agoWhat is tragic is that LLMs are learning how to use the word "cringe" improperly. If we're going to have AI overlords, it'd be great if they spoke with proper grammar.
- xpe 7mo ago> If we're going to have AI overlords, it'd be great if they spoke with proper grammar. People like blurring the lines and lots of people want AIs to bang out keystrokes in an order that is roughly human-like, so here we are. (Personally, I would love if Claude said "honestly" or "real" or "landed" less. Or pretty much never! I've tried banning the words. I've tried providing a list of alternatives, and I'm enjoying nothing like Great Success.) On the topic of "correct usage", until maybe ~3 years ago I had a pretty bog-standard understanding of what dictionaries do. They are authorities, right? Or at least experts in correct usage? That all changed when I read "Dictionary editors are historians of usage, not legislators of language." in "Disputing Definitions" by Yudkowsky : https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/7X2j8HAkWdmMoS8PE/disputing-definitions https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/7X2j8HAkWdmMoS8PE/disputing-... See also: "Finding the forgotten creators of the Oxford English Dictionary" on 1A, WAMU 88.5, March 26, 2026: https://wamu.org/story/26/03/26/finding-the-forgotten-creators-of-the-oxford-english-dictionary-rebroadcast/ https://wamu.org/story/26/03/26/finding-the-forgotten-creato... https://the1a.org/segments/finding-the-forgotten-creators-of-the-oxford-english-dictionary-2/ https://the1a.org/segments/finding-the-forgotten-creators-of... (has transcript)
- cdelsolar 7mo agopretty lame, Milhouse
- p0w3n3d 7mo agoResistance is futile But to be honest, I totally agree that AI is indeed destroying communities. We can already see YouTube redirecting all the reporting to AI which can allow some malicious agent claim your original video and demonetize it (i.e. steal your money). It happened to great YouTube people like Davie504. There is no way to appeal as the appeal is also treated by a robot
- Legend2440 7mo agoYouTube has been like that since long before LLMs. Their copyright strike system is broken and always has been. You're just picking random problems with tech and blaming them on AI.
- xpe 7mo ago> You're just picking random problems with tech and blaming them on AI. This comment is uncharitable, uncurious, and dismissive. Reality is multifaceted. It is worth trying to synthesize and reconcile different views first. To do that, it really helps to ask some questions first. Genuine questions, not gotchas. Even better is to say e.g. "Ok, but I prefer this model instead [...]: how does it compare to yours?".
- p0w3n3d 7mo agoFrom what I heard in the times before AI you could argue and contact a human being eventually. Now there's probably no human in the process... No "call the manager" button
- KronisLV 7mo agoI bet it's easy to be against AI, instead of those who use it in inhumane ways (and hold considerably more power). To them, AI is just a tool. If it wasn't AI, it would be buildings full of people and automated devices posting misinformation, outsourcing jobs and pushing for gig economy instead of respectable employment, having understaffed call centres and bad phone trees or knowledgebases that basically tell you to f off, lobbying against workers' rights and regulatory capture and any number of other misaligned motivations.
- amelius 7mo agoThis robot chasing wild boars is a preview of what is coming for us: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/6E2AH43ad7w https://www.youtube.com/shorts/6E2AH43ad7w
- OutOfHere 7mo agoThese people are dinosaurs and you know what happens to Dinosaurs. Until they meet their conclusion, they are for the moment at risk of becoming terrorists.
- julienreszka 7mo agoi always hated luddites, just one more reason to hate them
- overgard 7mo agoHonestly, it's no wonder there's a lot of pushback. We have these irresponsible CEO's talking non stop about taking peoples jobs at a time when people are struggling to make ends meet, all while taking in insane cash infusions. Why wouldn't people loathe AI at this point when the marketing is "we're going to fuck you over and there's nothing you can do about it".
- pesus 7mo agoBillboard company puts up billboards saying "don't hire humans". HN comments: "I just don't understand why people hate AI".
- Traster 7mo agoThis is slacktivism. I can kind of understand someone coming to the conclusion that we're replacing working class jobs with compute (caveat, I use working class more broadly than you), and that compute is pure capital. So essentially the capital class are wringing the neck of the working class. I think that, at the very least, is what the capital class is hoping for. If that's what you believe though, slightly poisoning a model is not even close to grappling with what is going on.
- lxgr 7mo ago> This isn’t exactly the modern equivalent of angry textile workers destroying power looms, but (if you’ll forgive the pun) it’s cut from the same cloth. And how did that work out for the textile workers? > The difference here (I hope) is that if enough of us pollute public spaces with misinformation intended for bots, it might be enough to compel AI companies to rethink the way they source training data. This... seems like an absurd asymmetry in effort on the side of the attacker? At least destroying a power loom is much easier than building one. Filtering out obvious garbage seems like a completely solved problem even with weak, cheap LLMs, and it's orders of magnitudes more efficient than humans coming up with artisanal garbage.
- graphememes 7mo agoThey do realize, they filter out this stuff right? You're just making someone elses job more lucrative.
- IAmGraydon 7mo agoNo, because if properly implemented, it's extremely difficult or impossible to discern as poison.
- inquirerGeneral 7mo ago[dead]
- jumploops 7mo agoI've noticed this trend most heavily on Reddit. Some communities are very pro-AI, adding AI summary comments to each thread, encouraging AI-written posts, etc.[0] Many subreddits are AI cautious[1][2], and a subset of those are fully anti-AI[3]. Apart from these "AI-focused" communities, it seems each "traditional" subreddit sits somewhere on the spectrum (photographers dealing with AI skepticism of their work[4], programmers mostly like it but still skeptical[5]). [0]https://www.reddit.com/r/vibecoding/ https://www.reddit.com/r/vibecoding/ [1]https://www.reddit.com/r/isthisAI/ https://www.reddit.com/r/isthisAI/ [2]https://www.reddit.com/r/aiwars/ https://www.reddit.com/r/aiwars/ [3]https://www.reddit.com/r/antiai/ https://www.reddit.com/r/antiai/ [4]https://www.reddit.com/r/photography/comments/1q4iv0k/what_do_you_say_to_people_who_think_every_photo/ https://www.reddit.com/r/photography/comments/1q4iv0k/what_d... [5]https://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1s6mtt7/ai_has_sucked_all_the_fun_out_of_programming/ https://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1s6mtt7/ai_has_suck...
- lxgr 7mo agoReddit (and more generally, human) groupthing in a nutshell. "Quick, clearly position yourself on this one-dimensional line (or maybe even better sort yourself into one of these two sets) so we don't have to engage in that pesky nuance thing!"
- jumploops 7mo agoYes, groupthink certainly seems to be pushing each community into the false dichotomy of AI good/bad, even if it's still early days. Another example from `r/bayarea` where the author is OK with AI but the top comments are increasingly wary of its potential for harm[0] [0]https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/1sp8wvz/is_it_just_me_or_is_ai_anxiety_kind_of_everywhere/ https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/1sp8wvz/is_it_just...
- jadar 7mo agoHasn’t griefing and trolling been a thing on the internet for a while? What makes this unique just because it’s AI instead of whatever else?
- lxgr 7mo ago> What makes this unique just because it’s AI instead of whatever else? I'd say the notion that expensive acts of sabotage (that can be cheaply neutralized) are a worthwhile pastime and anything other than virtue signaling is somewhat perplexing. (Not in a good way.)
- SwellJoe 7mo agoAny human scale "attack", e.g. the made up Everybody Loves Raymond episode isn't doing anything to hurt LLM training data. Might even help them detect exaggeration, satire, etc. when read in context and with other knowledge they have from other sources (like scraping IMDB or whatever, and already knowing the cast and plot summary of every episode of Everybody Loves Raymond). If there is an effective way to poison them, it'll be automated. And, it'll probably rely on an LLM to produce the poison, since it has to look legit enough to pass the quality filtering and classification stage of the data ingestion process, which is also probably driven by an LLM. One reason small models are getting better is because the training data being used is not just getting bigger, it's getting cleaner and classified more correctly/precisely. "Model collapse" hasn't happened, yet, even though something like half the web is AI slop, because as the models get smarter for human use in a variety of contexts, they also get smarter for use in preparing data for training the next model. There may very well still be risks of a mad cow disease like problem for LLMs, but I doubt a Markov chain website is going to contribute. The models still can't always tell fact from fiction, but they're not being hoodwinked by a nonsense generator.
- sn0n 7mo agoLet’s just break trust more. Makes sense amirite? LoL, in what reality does this even make sense??? it’s literally just spreading misinformation to people who can’t read between the lines because the tism stick got em before they were born.
- atleastoptimal 7mo agoI have a perhaps unique viewpoint among people in tech, at least among the sample I see on HN I simultaneously think 1. AI will be a massively impactful technology on the scale of the industrial revolution or greater 2. The potential upside of AI is enormous, but potential downside is just as big (utopia or certain ruin) 3. Most current AI companies are acting somewhat reasonably in a game-theory sense with respect to the deployment of their tech, and aren't especially evil or dastardly compared to Google in the 2000s, social media in the 2010s 4. AI safety is an under-appreciated concern and many who are spending time nitpicking the details are missing the bigger picture of what ASI and complete human obsolescence look like. 5. No amount of whiny protest, data sabotaging, or small-scale angst or claiming that AI is "fake" or hoping for the bubble to pop is going to have even a marginal effect on the development of AI. It is too powerful and the rewards are too great. If anything it will have an overall negative effect because it will convince labs that their potential role as a utopian, public benefactor will not be appreciated, so will instead align themselves with the military industrial complex for goodwill.
- munksbeer 7mo agoMy viewpoint is similar. There is way too much to gain if anything approaching ASI is possible, and too much to risk if a rival super power gains supremacy first. AI is not going away, the bubble is not going to pop. Maybe some valuations will crash but ultimately the technology will continue onward. I am mostly an optimist because I find it a more comfortable way to live. My hope, and also my expectation is that AI will progress incrementally and over the medium or long term will do the same as most other technology progress, and make the median person alive better off in the future. I reject the claims that dystopia is more likely.
- appz3 7mo ago[flagged]
- _-_-__-_-_- 7mo agohttps://theonlyblogever.com/blog/2026/onlyhuman.html https://theonlyblogever.com/blog/2026/onlyhuman.html, my commentary.
- aizl34 7mo ago[dead]
- periodjet 7mo ago> people seem to loathe AI, and are actively resisting it Maybe this person doesn’t care, but this observation they’ve made is almost certainly informed by an extremely narrow set of personal experiences, and is unlikely to reflect the wider truth.
- Lockal 7mo agoHere is a bit of meta humor. When I open https://stephvee.ca https://stephvee.ca I see: Sorry, you have been blocked. This website is using a security service to protect itself from online attacks. The action you just performed triggered the security solution. There are several actions that could trigger this block including submitting a certain word or phrase, a SQL command or malformed data. Did I ever open this website? I guess no. Did I ever attack this website (or did any AI crawling)? Also no. Implying the allegation is criminal, Cloudflare falsely accused me, should I seek legal counsel? I still was able to access the article via webarchive. And what I want to say, from my POV, I've done nothing wrong, website owners attack me. I don't see it every day, but I think it is more often than cases when people are kicking AI-powered food delivery robots.
- st3phvee 7mo agoThat is a standard Cloudflare response when a URL is blocked. It was a temporary block affecting ALL traffic to the URL while I updated the post, not a block targeted at anyone in particular.
- Lockal 7mo agoNo, I am still blocked (for every page on https://stephvee.ca/ https://stephvee.ca/). "Cloudflare Ray ID: 9efd477aef431473", if it helps somehow. My IP is not in any common blocklist, I experience no errors with other Cloudflare protected websites (using standard Chrome on Linux). It is very likely that stephvee.ca is configured excessively strict (rejecting by OS, or by large IP ranges, or idk)
- st3phvee 7mo agoApologies. :( Since you say you've never visited the website before, then that means you're either in one of the countries or in one of the residential IP ranges that I've had to block. I had to do that a while back, as I'd say roughly 99.9% of the traffic I received from those areas was malicious in nature (e.g. constantly spamming the site 24/7 for .env variables and whatnot, as well as crawling every single page on the site hundreds or even thousands of times every day). I couldn't block this traffic at the individual IP level, as there's simply too much of it, and they just move on to a different IP address when they're blocked. I can't stand the thought of blocking an actual human being who just wants to look at my site, but at the same time, what do you do? Just let the site be hammered by crawlers and scrapers 24/7 for the sake of less than a handful of human visitors every once in a while? People who don't run websites (I'm not saying this is you, just in general) have no idea how bad the crawling/scraping problem is right now. I don't even WANT to use Cloudflare, but I feel like I have no choice. It's either use Cloudflare, or pay an arm and a leg to host a hobby website and then have all my bandwidth chewed up by the crawlers and scrapers. The people and companies who run these bots are making the internet such a hostile place. It's especially infuriating that so many of them don't even identify themselves with user agents, and hide behind residential IPs instead. EDIT: Oh, and I can confirm: I investigated the ray ID, and yes, it was unfortunately a country block that triggered it. I receive a huge amount of bad traffic from your country every single day (mostly credential exploits), and I'm sorry you got caught up unintentionally in that block. I added an exception that should hopefully work, though, in the event that you do still want to visit.
- ares623 7mo agoI don't really understand all the comments here downplaying or ridiculing those who are worried about the impact of these tools. The way I see it, the existence of these tools have negative impact on some people and they are reacting to that. Are they not allowed to fight back in the way they think is appropriate?
- shantnutiwari 7mo agoSurprised to see the negative reaction this post is getting... seems a lot of ai bros are being triggered :) Edit/update: I can't even read the article because evidently I have been "blocked", no reason given. Great, maybe the negative posts here have a point.
- st3phvee 7mo agoSorry, I am the author: that block was just temporary and affected ALL traffic to that URL while I updated the post. The block was not targeted at anyone in particular. I never intended for that post to reach as many people as it did. :/ I have a very small audience of people who follow my writing, so it was kind of devastating to see comments here likening me and people like me to "a group that goes around burning libraries." Cheers to everyone who kept it civil.
- shantnutiwari 7mo agono probs, site is back up again :)
- st3phvee 7mo agoThanks for understanding. I never implement blocks on my site lightly.
- neop1x 7mo agoFunny, I can't even access his site: " Sorry, you have been blocked You are unable to access stephvee.ca " - CloudFlare Anti-AI but pro-MITM and pro-centralisation, limiting human visitors to his site...
- emil-lp 7mo agoSame here. Wayback Machine https://web.archive.org/web/20260420203809/https://stephvee.ca/blog/artificial%20intelligence/ai-resistance-is-growing/ https://web.archive.org/web/20260420203809/https://stephvee....
- rikkert 7mo agoctrl-f mirror here
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- CaptainFever 7mo agoWebsite-crawling services tend to have better luck accessing these websites due to their experience solving CloudFlare's challenges. Might want to try those.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 7mo agoBased on observations of other people using it, "AI" is already "poisoned" with too much low quality training material I'm not interested in searching The idea of intentionally "poisioning" an "AI" model seems to be the logical evolution of so-called "user-generated content" (UGC). It makes sense that non-cooperation is the eventual outcome of exploiting internet subscribers through coerced intermediation. For years now companies in Silicon Valley and Redmond, and other so-called "tech" companies elsewhere, have been generating revenue by using free information and UGC as bait for surveillance ad targets but without the licensing or production costs
- mdrzn 7mo agoPost has been edited out and an author note has replaced it.
- eudamoniac 7mo agoThis person is so fragile that she removed the entire post because some people were critical of it on an entirely other website (here, I assume). I cannot imagine that her thoughts on resistance were very worth reading?