Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a major bummer. When I first read the story (a few days ago, maybe?) I thought it was an interesting metaphor that didn't quite line up with the observed details of software development with AI. I assumed the writer was a journalist or author with a non-technical background trying to explore a more "utopian" vision of where trends could go. Without the inferred writer, it's much less interesting to me, except as…
What is it about it that makes the story less interesting to you? It's the same story, down to the same delicate details. When AI-slop stops being, well, slop, and just is everything that humans do, but much better, and much more efficient—will we have the same repulsion to it that many of us do now? I find it interesting to ponder. We look at the luddite movement as futile and somewhat fatalistic in a way. I feel li…
https://www.vice.com/en/article/luddites-definition-wrong-la...