4 ms·

It's interesting to notice which fields try to garner positive publicity by emphasizing that they DON'T use AI. There is increasing negativity about AI generall

It's interesting to notice which fields try to garner positive publicity by emphasizing that they DON'T use AI. There is increasing negativity about AI generally but it is quite revealing for an organization to try to make their refusal to use it a big part of their identity. Maybe I can start offering artisanal software development services to go after that sweet hipster dollar - code done 100% by hand, cruelty-free.

ElProlactin 2mo ago
I think there are two problems: 1. Most of the negativity about AI seems to relate to the economic effects, not the technology itself. 2. From what I've seen, the average person is still unable to identify AI created content, websites, etc. The website this post is about is clearly vibe coded (looks like everything including the copy is from Claude) but I'd guess that only a small fraction of the people who see it will recognize that.
- watwut 2mo ago
  People hate the technology, how it is used and talked about . Way more then its economic effects so far.
  - palmotea 2mo ago
    Yeah. LLMs (and the associated hype) are changing my job for the worse. While I agree it's useful sometimes, it's lead to a huge amount of pressure to eliminate the fun parts of my job (design and coding) and replace it with more soul-sucking drudgery (code reviews). There's also been a general increase in pressure that seems like it could lead to burnout through decrease in slack and/or stress from a reduction in quality and understanding.
  - happymellon 2mo ago
    You missed the environmental impact. In the UK we are in droughts, and we are being told to restrict our water usage. Somehow if you run a data centre then the rules don't apply. If the water company is telling me to restrict how much I wash my clothes then corps need to feel some of the pressure too.
- cuu508 2mo ago
  There's plenty of negativity of the technology itself as well. See for example how often the term "slop" is being used.
  - ElProlactin 2mo ago
    From what I see, average people can't even identify "slop". Lots of people use AI at work, to ask questions, etc. They just don't like the idea that this might cost them their jobs, and that a small number of people are getting ridiculously wealthy.
    - truncate 2mo ago
      How do you define average person here? I have friends who are not into tech, but use instagram or ChatGPT. They can tell. It’s just matter of using it enough times. For the work, I don’t think it’s just “costing the job” fear. It’s so many more things. Someone everyone is even more overworked, the amount of babysitting they require which everyone just seem to not talk that much about. Design docs and code that are increasingly weirder to read, sometimes make sense and other time look like they make sense but not really, the docslop, commit messages slop, I can go on. It’s mix of people issue where it’s race to bottom to increase utilization, which leads to less than ideal experience. Technology is great but it’s definitely getting more trust than it should when we accept the output. I think everyone would be much happier, and technology would have much better reputation if everyone just slows the f down and uses it bit more reasonably. What is reasonable, you figure that out by slowing down and actually thinking about the problem you are trying to solve … not just prompt your way out for everything.
      - ElProlactin 2mo ago
        > How do you define average person here? > Design docs and code that are increasingly weirder to read, sometimes make sense and other time look like they make sense but not really, the docslop, commit messages slop, I can go on. The "average person" I'm referring to is not an engineer/developer. It's an office worker, grandmother, HVAC technician, etc. Non-techies who use the internet for entertainment and information. From where I sit, most of them can't tell an AI-generated image from a real one (when the latest models are used), don't read something and think "it looks like Claude wrote this", etc.
- Terr_ 2mo ago
  > the economic effects, not the technology Into which of those categories do we place "company guts its support-system into uselessness by firing all the people and putting in 'AI' which mainly runs customers in circles"? Is it an economic effect because the company was enticed into it by the promise of cost-cutting, or is it a technology issue because the "AI" system can't handle exceptional situations? Perhaps it's a third thing, where "AI" is an excuse for one side to violate a social/legal norm.
  - moring 2mo ago
    We put it into the "irrelevant" section because AI is no worse than a human support drone who has no useful knowledge nor permission to act. It is one of those cases where AI is only tangentially related to the actual problem.
    - watwut 2mo ago
      It is absolutely worst then human support it is replacing.

ElProlactin 2mo ago

I think there are two problems: 1. Most of the negativity about AI seems to relate to the economic effects, not the technology itself. 2. From what I've seen, the average person is still unable to identify AI created content, websites, etc. The website this post is about is clearly vibe coded (looks like everything including the copy is from Claude) but I'd guess that only a small fraction of the people who see it will recognize that.

watwut 2mo ago
People hate the technology, how it is used and talked about . Way more then its economic effects so far.
- palmotea 2mo ago
  Yeah. LLMs (and the associated hype) are changing my job for the worse. While I agree it's useful sometimes, it's lead to a huge amount of pressure to eliminate the fun parts of my job (design and coding) and replace it with more soul-sucking drudgery (code reviews). There's also been a general increase in pressure that seems like it could lead to burnout through decrease in slack and/or stress from a reduction in quality and understanding.
- happymellon 2mo ago
  You missed the environmental impact. In the UK we are in droughts, and we are being told to restrict our water usage. Somehow if you run a data centre then the rules don't apply. If the water company is telling me to restrict how much I wash my clothes then corps need to feel some of the pressure too.
cuu508 2mo ago
There's plenty of negativity of the technology itself as well. See for example how often the term "slop" is being used.
- ElProlactin 2mo ago
  From what I see, average people can't even identify "slop". Lots of people use AI at work, to ask questions, etc. They just don't like the idea that this might cost them their jobs, and that a small number of people are getting ridiculously wealthy.
  - truncate 2mo ago
    How do you define average person here? I have friends who are not into tech, but use instagram or ChatGPT. They can tell. It’s just matter of using it enough times. For the work, I don’t think it’s just “costing the job” fear. It’s so many more things. Someone everyone is even more overworked, the amount of babysitting they require which everyone just seem to not talk that much about. Design docs and code that are increasingly weirder to read, sometimes make sense and other time look like they make sense but not really, the docslop, commit messages slop, I can go on. It’s mix of people issue where it’s race to bottom to increase utilization, which leads to less than ideal experience. Technology is great but it’s definitely getting more trust than it should when we accept the output. I think everyone would be much happier, and technology would have much better reputation if everyone just slows the f down and uses it bit more reasonably. What is reasonable, you figure that out by slowing down and actually thinking about the problem you are trying to solve … not just prompt your way out for everything.
    - ElProlactin 2mo ago
      > How do you define average person here? > Design docs and code that are increasingly weirder to read, sometimes make sense and other time look like they make sense but not really, the docslop, commit messages slop, I can go on. The "average person" I'm referring to is not an engineer/developer. It's an office worker, grandmother, HVAC technician, etc. Non-techies who use the internet for entertainment and information. From where I sit, most of them can't tell an AI-generated image from a real one (when the latest models are used), don't read something and think "it looks like Claude wrote this", etc.
Terr_ 2mo ago
> the economic effects, not the technology Into which of those categories do we place "company guts its support-system into uselessness by firing all the people and putting in 'AI' which mainly runs customers in circles"? Is it an economic effect because the company was enticed into it by the promise of cost-cutting, or is it a technology issue because the "AI" system can't handle exceptional situations? Perhaps it's a third thing, where "AI" is an excuse for one side to violate a social/legal norm.
- moring 2mo ago
  We put it into the "irrelevant" section because AI is no worse than a human support drone who has no useful knowledge nor permission to act. It is one of those cases where AI is only tangentially related to the actual problem.
  - watwut 2mo ago
    It is absolutely worst then human support it is replacing.