Live data from Hacker News

I Am An AI Hater

anthonymoser.github.io

21–30 of 515 posts

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#21
post #18

>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, I just can't take anything the author has to say seriously after the intro.

And that's why Trump won the election.

I'm serious. This sentence perfectly captures what the coastal cities sound like to the rest of the US, and why they voted for the crazy uncle over something unintelligible.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#22
I feel like this level of opprobrium is disproportionate. At least Claude has enabled me to live a more full life, spending extra time with those I love more while being able to rubberducky my random thoughts(who are they to judge what fleeting thoughts I allow myself?). I've been burned by AI falsehoods and read the same slop, sure, but I also went through the same with search engines and even books before that. This tool would have unlocked so much more of my potential had it existed 30 years ago and I'm excited(maybe a lot of dread too) to see what the next 30 years will bring.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#23

I appreciate seeing this point of view represented. It's not one I personally hold, but it is one a LOT of my friends hold, and I think it's important that it be given a voice, even if -- perhaps especially if -- a lot of people disagree with it. One of my friends sent me a delightful bastardization of the famous IBM quote: A COMPUTER CAN NEVER FEEL SPITEFUL OR [PASSIONATE†]. THEREFORE A COMPUTER MUST NEVER CREATE AR…

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.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#25

I appreciate seeing this point of view represented. It's not one I personally hold, but it is one a LOT of my friends hold, and I think it's important that it be given a voice, even if -- perhaps especially if -- a lot of people disagree with it. One of my friends sent me a delightful bastardization of the famous IBM quote: A COMPUTER CAN NEVER FEEL SPITEFUL OR [PASSIONATE†]. THEREFORE A COMPUTER MUST NEVER CREATE AR…

What was the original word?

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#26

> I became a hater by doing precisely those things AI cannot do: reading and understanding human language; thinking and reasoning about ideas; considering the meaning of my words and their context; With this the article lost all seriousness for me. I may be on board with a lot of what you are saying, but pretending you know the answer to these questions just makes you look as idiotic as anyone who says the opposite.

Consider that unlike a human, an AI cannot “pretend” to know anything, it is incapable of knowing how to pretend because it doesn’t actually “know” anything.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#27
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.

I suspect the cost will rise and we'll start seeing much less of it. As the free tier gets smaller and less useful, I think we'll see the pool of people who use AI casually start to shrink.

Seeing which use-cases make it through will certainly be interesting.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#28
post #18

>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, I just can't take anything the author has to say seriously after the intro.

Because they didn't explain it themselves, or because you disagree with the assessment?

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#30
post #18

>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, I just can't take anything the author has to say seriously after the intro.

After the intro and all the links to the statements he's saying? Because which of those aren't actually true
Post reply on HN