5 ms·

> You're being downvoted because you appear to be not asking genuinely I literally said I was asking genuinely. It's either one of two reasons imo: 1. Their

by thunky 5mo ago

> You're being downvoted because you appear to be not asking genuinely I literally said I was asking genuinely. It's either one of two reasons imo: 1. Their son hates "ai slop" and doesn't think AI is useful. 2. Their son is afraid of not being employable. I see #1 the most here. But I suspect it's a front because the posters don't want to admit #2. Hence my question. I figured it's easier for someone to admit someone else is afraid than admit they are.

techblueberry 5mo ago
Why would no one want to admit #2? I’m afraid. Also it feels like you responded to “people are downvoting you because it feels like a gotcha” with “yes, it is in fact a gotcha”
- thunky 5mo ago
  I'm just saying I don't see that much here. Most of the negativity is something like "its just a token generator". I don't care about downvotes. I'm just said that from my perspective anything positive about AI on this site will be met with them. What a twist for a tech site.
  - bigstrat2003 5mo ago
    > from my perspective anything positive about AI on this site will be met with them. What a twist for a tech site. Yes, people are hostile towards a crappy technology that doesn't work as advertised, and is looking like it will cause job shortages because companies are trying to lean on the tech even though it doesn't work. That shouldn't be remotely surprising.
array_key_first 5mo ago
So you... weren't... asking genuinely. You already came to a conclusion and just wanted to argue. Even if it's "secretly" #2 for most people, is that even unreasonable? It's so bizarre to me that people are acting like a supposedly existential threat on their livelihood is not a reasonable complaint or fear. Historically people, like, behead other people for that. I don't know, I'm older so I have much less fear about my livelihood but I can't blame young people for being worried about it. And, if they are, for choosing not to use AI. In a way, you could argue that using AI is self-destructive.
- thunky 5mo ago
  You're putting a lot of words in my mouth. I shared my assumption. I asked the question to get a real perspective from someone who was already sharing. I didn't know their answer before I asked and still don't. Also I never said #2 was unreasonable. And I don't blame anyone for being fearful either. But there is an anti-tech sentiment on this tech site, and I find ironic and disappointing.
  - wu2Fe7sp 5mo ago
    being anti-ai is not being anti-tech; people have posted language/editor/framework wars here for literal decades, nobody called not liking PHP being anti-tech
- tracerbulletx 5mo ago
  The idea that building a hive machine world of ultimate efficiency is a moral imperative greater than creating a good and fair life for the living people of the world is psychotic. We could of course use AI to benefit everyone, but it's so incredibly obvious to everyone that's not going to happen and its hand waved. That's insulting.
salawat 5mo ago
>But I suspect it's a front because the posters don't want to admit #2. Hence my question. And that's why you're getting reflexively downvoted. Because we can already tell by the way you telegraphed the question you aren't worth wasting time on. As it turns out, some of us don't think our youth shouldn't be able to have the same opportunities we did because a bunch of techies got the financial sector to go all in on greedmaxing. Those of us that actually believe in keeping society functional find very little to be recommended by blind "believer" types who just think you can yank the rug out from under your descendants, and force them to have to shape their life around choices you think are cool. One can be a tech enthusiast and still see that AI is crack cocaine to the type of people who'd set society on fire given they can find someone to help them think through the implementation details, which before AI, was basically the last control the professional caste had over the Capital class. The kids can understand this. Strangely, there is a surprising number of adults who don't seem to ever make the jump to understanding not everyone has entirely benevolent intentions hidden behind their smile.
- thunky 5mo ago
  Fine you're in bucket #2. Interesting how those who are united against AI have diverse reasons. > Because we can already tell by the way you telegraphed the question you aren't worth wasting time on. Nobody asked me before accusing me of bad intentions like you did, but I'll say anyway: I think using technology to reduce human effort is entirely the point. I believe our economy needs to adapt to advancement, not the other way around. Not that it's going to be easy, but the anti-tech crowd are going to lose. You can't stop progress. I know, an extreme philosophy to see on a tech forum. I say this as someone who used AI to assist with real estate and legal issues recently with great success. And as a coder by trade that no longer writes code. And I'm amazed that anyone could say it's not amazing technology.
  - salawat 5mo ago
    You can bucket me wherever you want hombre. Whatever makes you feel better. I walked away from tech voluntarily because I refuse to associate with or put my time toward a morally bankrupt industry, even if it is where my talents happen to align. I'm more than happy to be a subsistence humanitarian even if it requires me to sacrifice the gilt and opulence that comes with a tech salary. I won't abuse humanity. Nor will I enable those who ultimately intend to do so using my work as a proxy. Maybe you should consider doing the same. You might learn something by stepping out of the bubble about all the problems you're creating.
surgical_fire 5mo ago
If that was your stance, the question was never genuine. When you ask a question expecting a certain outcome, you are obviously not very curious about the answer. Also, HN is a somewhat large community. I am skeptical about AI for neither reason you mentioned - I think it's a deadend technology and the economics make no sense. A ridiculous waste of resources sucking up all the oxygen in the room. I don't really care about slop, because that would require me to think that human generated shit is somehow superior. Truth is most things made by humans also suck. I am also not at all afraid of losing my job to AI. I seriously doubt the competence and experience of anyone afraid of it. I am afraid of losing my job because of the incoming brutal economic conditions worldwide that I believe are in the horizon. Partly because of AI, but not because I think agents can do my job; because the humongous amount of money burned in the AI pit has to be accounted for.
- thunky 5mo ago
  > When you ask a question expecting a certain outcome, you are obviously not very curious about the answer. That's an absurd take imo. So you fall into bucket #1. More generally that AI isn't useful. At least not useful enough to invest time or money in. Which kindof shows that my question was reasonable. Multiple people on this thread have answered differently. But still a lot of hostility and anti-tech sentiment.
  - surgical_fire 5mo ago
    > So you fall into bucket #1. More generally that AI isn't useful. At least not useful enough to invest time or money in. Wrong. That's what you wanted to read. As I was saying you are not interested in my opinion, only on the answer you already presume. I think AI is moderately useful, although clearly not as useful as it is hyped to be. The amount of money poured into AI makes no sense not because it has no value, but because the investment will never see an adequate return.
    - thunky 5mo ago
      > Wrong. That's what you wanted to read. Check yourself maybe. I'm generalizing what you said to fall into one of my own two buckets, because you said the investment will never see an adequate return..

by thunky 5mo ago

techblueberry 5mo ago

Why would no one want to admit #2? I’m afraid. Also it feels like you responded to “people are downvoting you because it feels like a gotcha” with “yes, it is in fact a gotcha”

thunky 5mo ago
I'm just saying I don't see that much here. Most of the negativity is something like "its just a token generator". I don't care about downvotes. I'm just said that from my perspective anything positive about AI on this site will be met with them. What a twist for a tech site.
- bigstrat2003 5mo ago
  > from my perspective anything positive about AI on this site will be met with them. What a twist for a tech site. Yes, people are hostile towards a crappy technology that doesn't work as advertised, and is looking like it will cause job shortages because companies are trying to lean on the tech even though it doesn't work. That shouldn't be remotely surprising.

array_key_first 5mo ago

So you... weren't... asking genuinely. You already came to a conclusion and just wanted to argue. Even if it's "secretly" #2 for most people, is that even unreasonable? It's so bizarre to me that people are acting like a supposedly existential threat on their livelihood is not a reasonable complaint or fear. Historically people, like, behead other people for that. I don't know, I'm older so I have much less fear about my livelihood but I can't blame young people for being worried about it. And, if they are, for choosing not to use AI. In a way, you could argue that using AI is self-destructive.

thunky 5mo ago
You're putting a lot of words in my mouth. I shared my assumption. I asked the question to get a real perspective from someone who was already sharing. I didn't know their answer before I asked and still don't. Also I never said #2 was unreasonable. And I don't blame anyone for being fearful either. But there is an anti-tech sentiment on this tech site, and I find ironic and disappointing.
- wu2Fe7sp 5mo ago
  being anti-ai is not being anti-tech; people have posted language/editor/framework wars here for literal decades, nobody called not liking PHP being anti-tech
tracerbulletx 5mo ago
The idea that building a hive machine world of ultimate efficiency is a moral imperative greater than creating a good and fair life for the living people of the world is psychotic. We could of course use AI to benefit everyone, but it's so incredibly obvious to everyone that's not going to happen and its hand waved. That's insulting.

salawat 5mo ago

>But I suspect it's a front because the posters don't want to admit #2. Hence my question. And that's why you're getting reflexively downvoted. Because we can already tell by the way you telegraphed the question you aren't worth wasting time on. As it turns out, some of us don't think our youth shouldn't be able to have the same opportunities we did because a bunch of techies got the financial sector to go all in on greedmaxing. Those of us that actually believe in keeping society functional find very little to be recommended by blind "believer" types who just think you can yank the rug out from under your descendants, and force them to have to shape their life around choices you think are cool. One can be a tech enthusiast and still see that AI is crack cocaine to the type of people who'd set society on fire given they can find someone to help them think through the implementation details, which before AI, was basically the last control the professional caste had over the Capital class. The kids can understand this. Strangely, there is a surprising number of adults who don't seem to ever make the jump to understanding not everyone has entirely benevolent intentions hidden behind their smile.

thunky 5mo ago
Fine you're in bucket #2. Interesting how those who are united against AI have diverse reasons. > Because we can already tell by the way you telegraphed the question you aren't worth wasting time on. Nobody asked me before accusing me of bad intentions like you did, but I'll say anyway: I think using technology to reduce human effort is entirely the point. I believe our economy needs to adapt to advancement, not the other way around. Not that it's going to be easy, but the anti-tech crowd are going to lose. You can't stop progress. I know, an extreme philosophy to see on a tech forum. I say this as someone who used AI to assist with real estate and legal issues recently with great success. And as a coder by trade that no longer writes code. And I'm amazed that anyone could say it's not amazing technology.
- salawat 5mo ago
  You can bucket me wherever you want hombre. Whatever makes you feel better. I walked away from tech voluntarily because I refuse to associate with or put my time toward a morally bankrupt industry, even if it is where my talents happen to align. I'm more than happy to be a subsistence humanitarian even if it requires me to sacrifice the gilt and opulence that comes with a tech salary. I won't abuse humanity. Nor will I enable those who ultimately intend to do so using my work as a proxy. Maybe you should consider doing the same. You might learn something by stepping out of the bubble about all the problems you're creating.

surgical_fire 5mo ago

If that was your stance, the question was never genuine. When you ask a question expecting a certain outcome, you are obviously not very curious about the answer. Also, HN is a somewhat large community. I am skeptical about AI for neither reason you mentioned - I think it's a deadend technology and the economics make no sense. A ridiculous waste of resources sucking up all the oxygen in the room. I don't really care about slop, because that would require me to think that human generated shit is somehow superior. Truth is most things made by humans also suck. I am also not at all afraid of losing my job to AI. I seriously doubt the competence and experience of anyone afraid of it. I am afraid of losing my job because of the incoming brutal economic conditions worldwide that I believe are in the horizon. Partly because of AI, but not because I think agents can do my job; because the humongous amount of money burned in the AI pit has to be accounted for.

thunky 5mo ago
> When you ask a question expecting a certain outcome, you are obviously not very curious about the answer. That's an absurd take imo. So you fall into bucket #1. More generally that AI isn't useful. At least not useful enough to invest time or money in. Which kindof shows that my question was reasonable. Multiple people on this thread have answered differently. But still a lot of hostility and anti-tech sentiment.
- surgical_fire 5mo ago
  > So you fall into bucket #1. More generally that AI isn't useful. At least not useful enough to invest time or money in. Wrong. That's what you wanted to read. As I was saying you are not interested in my opinion, only on the answer you already presume. I think AI is moderately useful, although clearly not as useful as it is hyped to be. The amount of money poured into AI makes no sense not because it has no value, but because the investment will never see an adequate return.
  - thunky 5mo ago
    > Wrong. That's what you wanted to read. Check yourself maybe. I'm generalizing what you said to fall into one of my own two buckets, because you said the investment will never see an adequate return..