4 ms·

I am so very tired of people who compare AI to smart phones or the Internet as large. There were never such wide scale and, above all, centralized efforts to c

I am so very tired of people who compare AI to smart phones or the Internet as large. There were never such wide scale and, above all, centralized efforts to coerce and shame people into using the Internet or smart phones in spite of their best efforts.

GaryBluto 6mo ago
Nobody is "shaming" anybody into using AI but their jobs may require use of it. It's the same as all the secretaries who found themselves having to make the jump from the typewriter to the computer.
- rockskon 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  - tomhow 6mo ago
    Please don't fulminate or post snarky comments on HN. The guidelines make it clear we're trying for something better here. If an argument has merit, it can be presented thoughtfully and persuasively, rather than belligerently. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - rockskon 6mo ago
      How am I supposed to respond to someone who directly contradicts their own argument immediately after making it? "I'm not shaming! Not embracing AI is comparable to people who didn't embrace smart phones or the Internet though". This is a regurgitation of a marketing slogan frequented by OpenAI and similar organizations for the past four years. "AI is the future. If you don't embrace it you will be left behind". It's intellectually insulting to be subject to as it relies primarily on fear to convince.
      - deleted 6mo ago
        [deleted]
      - tomhow 6mo ago
        First, the guidelines apply no matter who or what you are replying to. If it were okay to ignore the guidelines any time we found a particular comment unpalatable, there'd be no point having them. Second, your participation in the thread began as fulmination, with “I am so very tired of people who...”, and then continues in this belligerent style right through to your reply to me... > This is a regurgitation of a marketing slogan frequented > It's intellectually insulting to be subject to as it relies primarily on fear to convince This style of argumentation is beneath what we're hoping for on HN, as it paints a simplistic conspiracy theory or narrow commercial incentive as the only plausible explanation for a trend. Things are never that simple, and arguments like that shut off curiosity, when the primary purpose of HN is to cultivate more curiosity.
        rockskon 6mo ago
        I am not positing any sort of conspiracy. The sentiment is also frequented by people who have no commercial incentive to say it - possibly a result of a successful marketing campaign, possibly a conclusion they came to independently, or possibly some other reason - the reason is not something I would know. But I stand by my assertion that the argument is primarily an appeal to emotion - fear. And I do not see how acknowledging that (albeit in a less emotive way than I initially did) is beneath the standards of discussion for HN. That said - I can keep my fulminations to myself and phrase my posts in a less confrontational manner. Those aren't exactly conducive to productive discussion.
lxgr 6mo ago
If you think that people starting to use computers in their jobs (or even in their personal lives) was a completely seamless and controversy-free affair, you must be pretty young (or I must be getting old, as I definitely remember it). I mean, it's still ongoing! Tons of people prefer to do things the analog way, and it's certainly not for a lack of companies trying, as the analog way is usually much more expensive. In their personal lives, everybody should of course be free to do what they want, but I also doubt that zero people have been fired for e.g. refusing to train to use a computer and email because they preferred the aesthetics of typewriters or handwritten memos and physical intra-office mail.
tptacek 6mo ago
Oh, yeah, no, definitely super easy to have been a professional software developer over the last 20 years whilst conscientiously objecting from using the Internet.
- rockskon 6mo ago
  And was there this massive, aggressive effort by a tiny handful of companies to mandate software developers use the Internet? Because I seem to recall people generally willingly choosing to use it as opposed to the aggressive efforts by blue chip tech companies to force the public at large to use it.
  - theamk 6mo ago
    No matter what OpenAI or Nvidia says, they cannot force the developers of some company to use AI. They simply lack power to do this directly (with a very few exceptions, like their subcontractors) What they can do, however, is they can run heavy advertising campaign targeted at executives. And once executives are convinced, they will write AI policies, and some will force their workers to use AI. And this has been happening all the time, the examples are too numerous. Executives decided the shops will now use computerized registers. The cashiers had to adopt, or get fired. Executives decided - no more typewriters. All documents must be written in Microsoft Word, stored in Sharepoint. The workers have to learn Microsoft Word and Sharepoint or get fired. Executives decided that that engineers (not computer ones, mechanical ones) should use CAD instead of drafting machines. The amount of engineers who were "let go" because they were protractor head wizards but could not figure out the mouse was truly large. For something closer to CS, there was version control, automated tests, git, github... In a lot of cases, people where not "willingly choosing it" - if the rest of your team started using SourceSafe, you can't keep using your favorite shared folder anymore, not if you want others to see your results. "willingly choosing it" only works for personal projects, it is never guaranteed for hired workers.
    - rockskon 6mo ago
      The endless copilot integrations and promotions and insistence of nudges from Microslop, Google search mandating AI usage without going well beyond what most users know to avoid it, misleading YouTube video summaries.....these are all examples you cannot meaningfully opt out of that goes well beyond advertising to executives.

GaryBluto 6mo ago

Nobody is "shaming" anybody into using AI but their jobs may require use of it. It's the same as all the secretaries who found themselves having to make the jump from the typewriter to the computer.

rockskon 6mo ago
[flagged]
- tomhow 6mo ago
  Please don't fulminate or post snarky comments on HN. The guidelines make it clear we're trying for something better here. If an argument has merit, it can be presented thoughtfully and persuasively, rather than belligerently. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - rockskon 6mo ago
    How am I supposed to respond to someone who directly contradicts their own argument immediately after making it? "I'm not shaming! Not embracing AI is comparable to people who didn't embrace smart phones or the Internet though". This is a regurgitation of a marketing slogan frequented by OpenAI and similar organizations for the past four years. "AI is the future. If you don't embrace it you will be left behind". It's intellectually insulting to be subject to as it relies primarily on fear to convince.
    - deleted 6mo ago
      [deleted]
    - tomhow 6mo ago
      First, the guidelines apply no matter who or what you are replying to. If it were okay to ignore the guidelines any time we found a particular comment unpalatable, there'd be no point having them. Second, your participation in the thread began as fulmination, with “I am so very tired of people who...”, and then continues in this belligerent style right through to your reply to me... > This is a regurgitation of a marketing slogan frequented > It's intellectually insulting to be subject to as it relies primarily on fear to convince This style of argumentation is beneath what we're hoping for on HN, as it paints a simplistic conspiracy theory or narrow commercial incentive as the only plausible explanation for a trend. Things are never that simple, and arguments like that shut off curiosity, when the primary purpose of HN is to cultivate more curiosity.
      - rockskon 6mo ago
        I am not positing any sort of conspiracy. The sentiment is also frequented by people who have no commercial incentive to say it - possibly a result of a successful marketing campaign, possibly a conclusion they came to independently, or possibly some other reason - the reason is not something I would know. But I stand by my assertion that the argument is primarily an appeal to emotion - fear. And I do not see how acknowledging that (albeit in a less emotive way than I initially did) is beneath the standards of discussion for HN. That said - I can keep my fulminations to myself and phrase my posts in a less confrontational manner. Those aren't exactly conducive to productive discussion.

lxgr 6mo ago

If you think that people starting to use computers in their jobs (or even in their personal lives) was a completely seamless and controversy-free affair, you must be pretty young (or I must be getting old, as I definitely remember it). I mean, it's still ongoing! Tons of people prefer to do things the analog way, and it's certainly not for a lack of companies trying, as the analog way is usually much more expensive. In their personal lives, everybody should of course be free to do what they want, but I also doubt that zero people have been fired for e.g. refusing to train to use a computer and email because they preferred the aesthetics of typewriters or handwritten memos and physical intra-office mail.

tptacek 6mo ago

Oh, yeah, no, definitely super easy to have been a professional software developer over the last 20 years whilst conscientiously objecting from using the Internet.

rockskon 6mo ago
And was there this massive, aggressive effort by a tiny handful of companies to mandate software developers use the Internet? Because I seem to recall people generally willingly choosing to use it as opposed to the aggressive efforts by blue chip tech companies to force the public at large to use it.
- theamk 6mo ago
  No matter what OpenAI or Nvidia says, they cannot force the developers of some company to use AI. They simply lack power to do this directly (with a very few exceptions, like their subcontractors) What they can do, however, is they can run heavy advertising campaign targeted at executives. And once executives are convinced, they will write AI policies, and some will force their workers to use AI. And this has been happening all the time, the examples are too numerous. Executives decided the shops will now use computerized registers. The cashiers had to adopt, or get fired. Executives decided - no more typewriters. All documents must be written in Microsoft Word, stored in Sharepoint. The workers have to learn Microsoft Word and Sharepoint or get fired. Executives decided that that engineers (not computer ones, mechanical ones) should use CAD instead of drafting machines. The amount of engineers who were "let go" because they were protractor head wizards but could not figure out the mouse was truly large. For something closer to CS, there was version control, automated tests, git, github... In a lot of cases, people where not "willingly choosing it" - if the rest of your team started using SourceSafe, you can't keep using your favorite shared folder anymore, not if you want others to see your results. "willingly choosing it" only works for personal projects, it is never guaranteed for hired workers.
  - rockskon 6mo ago
    The endless copilot integrations and promotions and insistence of nudges from Microslop, Google search mandating AI usage without going well beyond what most users know to avoid it, misleading YouTube video summaries.....these are all examples you cannot meaningfully opt out of that goes well beyond advertising to executives.