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

I Am An AI Hater

anthonymoser.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 515 posts

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#171

Post by codyb »

StopDisinfo910 wrote: post #20

Amusingly things are going with AI like with any complex topics nowadays. It’s easier to hold a strong position than a nuanced one. So you see a lot of vapid articles either for or against, even - or especially actually - if you don’t really know for or against what exactly, and very few insightful ones. Plague of our ages I guess. Ironically AI might even make it worse.

I suspect we're in a bubble... and when it pops, the useful, profitable work will stay around. A bunch of things will also disappear.

And then we'll wait till the next bubble.

Gains seem to have leveled off tremendously. As far as I can tell folk were saying "Wow, look at this, I can get it to generate code... it does really well at tests, and small well defined tasks"

And a year or a year and a half later we're at like... that + "it's slightly better than it was before!" lol.

So, yea, I dunno, I suspect we'll see a fair amount fall away and some useful things to continue to be used.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#172

Post by visarga »

iLoveOncall wrote: post #91

I don't think the author hates AI, but rather the people developing AI, and in particular the CEOs and others of those companies. This is particularly clear in this paragraph: > And to what end? In a kind of nihilistic symmetry, their dream of the perfect slave machine drains the life of those who use it as well as those who turn the gears. What is life but what we choose, who we know, what we experience? Incoherent…

> their dream of the perfect slave machine

I don't get if AI is supposed to be a slave or a machine. Is it sentient or a toaster?

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#173

Post by simianwords »

dpoloncsak wrote: post #111

> Critics have already written thoroughly about the environmental harms, the reinforcement of bias and generation of racist output, the cognitive harms and AI supported suicides, the problems with consent and copyright... This paragraph really pisses me off and I'm not sure why. > Critics have already written thoroughly about the environmental harms Didn't google just prove there is little to no environmental harm, I…

Don't try to argue using logic against a person who came to their position primarily through emotions!

All these points are just trying to forcefully legitimise his hatred.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#174

Post by seigler »

danielbln wrote: post #14
monkaiju wrote: post #5

I love the high citation per sentence ratio and couldn't agree more with the sentiment. It seems that, finally, people are starting to verbalize sufficiently direct responses to the AI slop being flung at us from all angles.

Outright rejection won't help with making AI go away. We can only change it, but it is here to stay.

Nobody knows if it's "here to stay". https://tomrenner.com/posts/llm-inevitabilism/ Some of us are still consciously choosing a life with as little slop as possible.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#175

Post by fooqux »

petralithic wrote: post #67
randcraw wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Picasso's Guernica was born of hate, his hate of war, of dehumanization for petty political ends. No computer will ever empathize with the senseless inhumanity of war to produce such a work. It must forever parrot.

A human might generate a piece of media using AI (either via a slot machine spin or with more advanced workflows like ComfyUI) and once they deem it looks good enough for their purpose, they might display it to represent what they want it to represent. If Guernica was AI generated but still displayed by Picasso as a statement about war, it would still be art. Tools do not dictate what art is and isn't, it is about th…

I read what you wrote, and it seems to me you think these two things are equal:

A human using their creativity to create a painting showcasing a statement about war.

A human asking AI to create a painting showcasing a statement about war.

I do not wish to use strawmen tactics. So I'll ask if you think the above is equal and true.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#176

Post by frozenseven »

miltonlost wrote: post #47
laincide wrote: post #24

[flagged]

Look up who the Luddites were and how they actually were right and instead had a centuries-long campaign against them and their real beliefs and concerns. (

I've looked up who the Luddites were. Terrorists, basically. Horrible people.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#177

Post by Proofread0592 »

narrator wrote: post #109

Some recent takes I've heard: "AI makes me feel stupid" - economically struggling millennial "This waymo stuff the money goes to big corporations instead of me a hard working American that contributes to the economy" - Uber driver Meanwhile, all the wealthy business owners are fascinated with it cause they can get things done without having to hire.

> Meanwhile, all the wealthy business owners are fascinated with it cause they can get things done without having to hire.

I think you need to add the word potentially in front of "get things done". The venn diagram of what current LLMs can do, and what wealthy business owners think LLMs can do, has the smallest of overlaps.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#178

Post by phoenixhaber »

Many of the comments presupposes that human free will isn't mechanic or deterministic at some level of introspection. How would we know a sufficiently complicated AI were incapable of love or hate and how would this differ from ourselves saving in one is made of silicon and one of neurobiology? This isn't an easy question.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#180

Post by visarga »

Our society would break down without language. Without math there would be much fewer people because we would not be able to have large cities and commerce. Without technology we can't manage anymore.

The moral? It's always been an unbalanced society tumbling into the future. Even if AI has both downsides and upsides we will still make it a part of us. Consider the scale - 1B people chatting for the likes of 1T tokens/day. That amount of AI-language has got to influence human language and abilities as well.

Point by point rebuttals:

- environmental harms - so does any use of electricity, fuel or construction

- reinforcement of bias - all ours, reflected back, and it depends on prompting as well

- generation of racist output - depends on who's prompting what

- cognitive harms and AI supported suicides - we are the consequence sink for all things AI, good and bad

- problems with consent and copyright - only if you think abstractions should be owned

- enables fraud and disinformation and harassment and surveillance - all existed before 2020

- exploitation of workers, excuse to fire workers and de-skill work - that is AI being used as excuse, can't be AI's fault

- they don’t actually reason and probability and association are inadequate to the goal of intelligence - apparently you don't need reasoning to win gold at IMO

- people think it makes them faster when it makes them slower - and advanced LLMs are just 2.5 years old, give people time to learn to use it

- it is inherently mediocre - all of us have been at some point

- it is at its core a fascist technology rooted in the ideology of supremacy - LOL, generalizing Grok to all LLMs?

The author mixes hate of AI with hate of people behind AI and hate of how other people excuse their actions blaming AI.

Post reply on HN