Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Only 16 Percent of Americans Think AI Will Have a Positive Impact on Society

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 521 posts

Re: Only 16 Percent of Americans Think AI Will Have a Positive Impact on Society

#281

Post by rayiner »

wyre wrote: post #274
rayiner wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Like do people think that these AI companies will create some superintelligence, suck up all the financial benefits of that, and then just decide to share it with the rest of us out of kindness? I don’t get this. It’s like worrying in 1960 that the companies that invented computers will hoard the benefits of computing. It doesn’t make any sense. There is no secret formula to any of this. The math underlying the mod…

The 60s were 60 years ago. There were regulations back then that protected the common folk and capitalism wasn't as ruthless and aligned with the will of the 0.1% as it is now. I want to be optimistic and agree with you, but I don't think the parallels are as strong as you say they are. We already have Anthropic withhold Mythos from the public, the governement now allowing the use of Fable, I don't think its farfetch…

> The 60s were 60 years ago. There were regulations back then that protected the common folk and capitalism wasn't as ruthless and aligned with the will of the 0.1% as it is now.

No company in the 1990s ever achieved as much market power as IBM did in the 1960s-1980s. IBM controlled 70% of the computer market at the time.

Can you give me a concrete example that’s relevant to the deployment of computers?

Re: Only 16 Percent of Americans Think AI Will Have a Positive Impact on Society

#282

Post by boothby »

rayiner wrote: post #202
slg wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The only hope we have is that they're wrong, and their power to change things will be minimal. What even is the optimistic outcome if they are right? What are we all working towards? Like do people think that these AI companies will create some superintelligence, suck up all the financial benefits of that, and then just decide to share it with the rest of us out of kindness? Because I legitimately can't see a realis…

> Like do people think that these AI companies will create some superintelligence, suck up all the financial benefits of that, and then just decide to share it with the rest of us out of kindness? I don’t get this. It’s like worrying in 1960 that the companies that invented computers will hoard the benefits of computing. It doesn’t make any sense. There is no secret formula to any of this. The math underlying the mod…

> The math underlying the models is widely known, and there are tons of competitors, including foreign competitors.

Foreign militaries investing in autonomous warfare does not assuage my concerns about my country investing in autonomous warfare.

Also, have you been paying attention to median wages vs median CEO wages since the 1960s? The benefits of computing really have gone to the captains of industry.

Re: Only 16 Percent of Americans Think AI Will Have a Positive Impact on Society

#283

Post by jstummbillig »

awkwardpotato wrote: post #171
jstummbillig wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reality is non-deterministic (not actually, but in practice). We do strange things to balance this out all the time. Thinking that computer software must be exempt from that mess as a goal is just strange, and concerns itself too much with the ideal of a tool and not enough with the more important question: What if our lives get much, much better? Roughly everyone wants more out of life including the top one percent…

> Thinking that computer software must be exempt from that mess as a goal is just strange Software is deterministic, it has been since its inception[0]. Why go from something objective/provable to something that does "strange things", when we already have former? It's like making bricks out of paper and declaring "actually, this is logical next step for bricks because stuff waves in the wind". > What if our lives get…

Here is a simple and possibly clarifying thought experiment: Would you be willing to switch your standard of living with the standard of the median person living on this planet? (And I would urge you to look up what that looks like, in case you are unsure).

As long as you are not (and I sympathize) I have zero clue how to justify any delay in getting everyone at least to our current level.

I understand that there are risks and we should work hard to guard against them. But no society has seriously considered giving up driving while we figure out global warming. People want a good life, that's just the selfish fucks we are, and it's upon those with clout to will it for everyone.

> Why go from something objective/provable to something that does "strange things", when we already have former?

Because it does something different. It's not from/to. LLMs are subbing in for humans, not for deterministic computing. Replacing deterministic computing with LLMs for tasks that have be perfectly solved without LLMs would be wasteful and silly.

Re: Only 16 Percent of Americans Think AI Will Have a Positive Impact on Society

#284

Post by carlosjobim »

fl4regun wrote: post #225
carlosjobim wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Life is like a supermarket. You are supposed to seek out the good things. You can't stop and stand and rage in the first aisle, which is filled with ultra processed food for the masses. You have to seek out the good ingredients in the back and make an effort. You can't get stuck in life being disappointed in average people. You have to seek out good people. And good places and good things. Or stay in the cranky cynic…

You are naive, you don't seriously expect people to "seek out the good ingredients" do you? When the shit ingredients are addictive, cheaper than the good ones and more available? The entire premise of these platforms is use whatever edges possible to get more ad money, they do that by getting people addicted to their phones and using psychological tricks that have been refined through over a decade of A/B testing to…

I'm speaking to whoever wants to listen. Advice is a gift that you are free to refuse.

Re: Only 16 Percent of Americans Think AI Will Have a Positive Impact on Society

#285

Post by sleples »

vanuatu wrote: post #91

It's interesting that many developing and Asian countries have a more positive view of AI: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/06/15/people-around-the-w... How much of this is due to AI vs. the government and corporate structures in society? (Saw elsewhere that Chinese people were also much more optimistic)

Part of it is the ridiculous fear-based marketing campaign spearheaded by Anthropic et al. about how AI will automate all jobs and you'll be left behind. Works for enterprise/CEOs, predictably makes regular people hate the mere mention of AI, Asian countries don't have this nearly to the same extent.

Re: Only 16 Percent of Americans Think AI Will Have a Positive Impact on Society

#287

Post by slg »

rayiner wrote: post #202
slg wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The only hope we have is that they're wrong, and their power to change things will be minimal. What even is the optimistic outcome if they are right? What are we all working towards? Like do people think that these AI companies will create some superintelligence, suck up all the financial benefits of that, and then just decide to share it with the rest of us out of kindness? Because I legitimately can't see a realis…

> Like do people think that these AI companies will create some superintelligence, suck up all the financial benefits of that, and then just decide to share it with the rest of us out of kindness? I don’t get this. It’s like worrying in 1960 that the companies that invented computers will hoard the benefits of computing. It doesn’t make any sense. There is no secret formula to any of this. The math underlying the mod…

>It’s like worrying in 1960 that the companies that invented computers will hoard the benefits of computing.

Isn't that what happened? There was enough competition among computing companies that they weren't able to completely monopolize all the productivity improvements, but the financial benefits were mostly captured by the capital class in one way or another.[1]

TVs might be cheaper today and we all like watching Netflix, but I'm skeptical of the idea that the financial wellbeing of the average American has been improved by computers.

[1] - https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-inequality/a-guide...

Re: Only 16 Percent of Americans Think AI Will Have a Positive Impact on Society

#288

Post by ben_w »

singpolyma3 wrote: post #237
rayiner wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Like do people think that these AI companies will create some superintelligence, suck up all the financial benefits of that, and then just decide to share it with the rest of us out of kindness? I don’t get this. It’s like worrying in 1960 that the companies that invented computers will hoard the benefits of computing. It doesn’t make any sense. There is no secret formula to any of this. The math underlying the mod…

I mean. From a financial PoV that's exactly what happened

Did they, though? Intel, IBM, DEC and Honeywell were big names, but they're not FAANG.

Other than Nintendo, how many games companies today were around back then?

Re: Only 16 Percent of Americans Think AI Will Have a Positive Impact on Society

#290

Post by paytonjjones »

wyre wrote: post #274
rayiner wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Like do people think that these AI companies will create some superintelligence, suck up all the financial benefits of that, and then just decide to share it with the rest of us out of kindness? I don’t get this. It’s like worrying in 1960 that the companies that invented computers will hoard the benefits of computing. It doesn’t make any sense. There is no secret formula to any of this. The math underlying the mod…

The 60s were 60 years ago. There were regulations back then that protected the common folk and capitalism wasn't as ruthless and aligned with the will of the 0.1% as it is now. I want to be optimistic and agree with you, but I don't think the parallels are as strong as you say they are. We already have Anthropic withhold Mythos from the public, the governement now allowing the use of Fable, I don't think its farfetch…

What regulations do you feel protected common folk from capitalism during the development of computing, and how have they weakened?
Post reply on HN