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

The AI Hate Progression

xodium.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 201 posts

Re: The AI Hate Progression

#81

Post by munk-a »

dvt wrote: post #43
john_strinlai wrote: post #33

> Consent needs to be a core concept of it. If people don't want to use it, respect that opinion. this was gone before chatgpt was even a twinkle in someone's eye. "maybe later" replaced "no" on popups. automatically being opted-into mailing lists when ordering pizza or whatever (pizza hut is the worst). B2B emails that have size 3 font with a random word selected that i have to put in the subject line to unsubscribe…

Google started indexing copyrighted data without consent in 1999, Yahoo in 1994. Absolute delusion to think that ChatGPT is the one that broke consent.

I think there really is a fair difference between pure indexing and reoffering. I also don't think the way Google currently operates is still anywhere close to pure indexing - programs of theirs like amp and the news tab specifically deny sites visitors instead of their site serving as a visibility boost.

I am sure there are people who'd object to even being indexed but most niche communities were pretty rabid about getting more visibility to find more members.

Re: The AI Hate Progression

#82

Post by tennfown »

comrade1234 wrote: post #29

I have a coworker that irrationally hated ai too. He says something about how his daughter and friends' hobby is jailbreaking ai. We have a product used in call centers. It turns out ai is amazing in triaging (surveying) people. We can ask a question in English and if they respond n another language (any language) the ai will switch to that language, ask its questions, and then give us the answers in English. This wa…

> We have a product used in call centers. It turns out ai is amazing in triaging (surveying) people. We can ask a question in English and if they respond n another language (any language) the ai will switch to that language, ask its questions, and then give us the answers in English. This was stuff that was impossible 10-years-ago.

That’s great, but the problem is wayyy more companies are using AI so they can drop the call center and just offer you no real way to talk to a person and no real way to resolve problems any more complicated than the lowest common denominator.

Re: The AI Hate Progression

#83

Post by ryandrake »

thewebguyd wrote: post #57
skybrian wrote: post #23

Maybe we could find common ground in hating the AI gold rush/arms race? If people weren't in such a huge hurry to build it out as fast as possible, maybe there would be more time to figure out how do things right? Seen from that perspective, adding friction (for example, not releasing Mythos widely and suspending Fable for a while) is not so bad. If the bubble collapsed then that would also give us more time.

> Maybe we could find common ground in hating the AI gold rush/arms race? I think this is, for the most part, the ground on which AI hate is founded on, no? Outside of the artist case, which I sympathize with, the real issue isn't the technology itself, its the attitudes and business practices around it. I don't hate AI. But I do hate that OpenAI effectively cornered the dram market on a scale close to what the hunt…

I just hate how AI has sucked the oxygen out of every room that other technologies once occupied. There was once a great diversity of computing things you could be interested in, use to make your work productive and enjoyable, and make into a large part of your career. Now it's just "use AI" everywhere.

I got into computers because I like computers and programming. Not whatever the fuck this is.

Re: The AI Hate Progression

#84

Post by flax »

deflator wrote: post #64
Varelion wrote: post #37

I, and everyone in my social circle, go out of our way to not touch anything that was had AI significantly involved in the creation process. Hypocritically, I use AI a lot at work. I see it as using it a lot more than I am paying for, to actively sink OpenAI/Claud's bottom line. I have a coworker that does the same. His logic was sound -- when something is heavily subsidized, abuse it.

More or less our approach here too. They offered to help with our work at a loss for themselves, why not take them up on it? Not necessarily to hurt the AI labs, but just because we'd be foolish not to take something offered at such a discount.

Right. Exactly. I'd be a fool to refuse that first free hit of heroin.

Re: The AI Hate Progression

#85

Post by happytoexplain »

empath75 wrote: post #59
pesus wrote: post #5

Good write up, and I think it accurately sums up many people's feelings about AI. One thing I would disagree with is the idea of AI getting a do over. Even if they somehow managed to do that, the idea of AI is fundamentally tainted for whole generations of people, and its reputation only gets worse every day. There's no coming back from that any time soon.

Statements like this are just totally detached from reality. AI products are incredibly popular, even amongst people who say they dislike “AI”. Maybe that acronym is tainted, but the technology isn’t going anywhere.

You didn't say anything that conflicts with what the parent said. You are the one who is detached from reality. People use computers and hate computers at the same time. People use programming languages and hate programming languages at the same time. People participate in capitalism and hate capitalism at the same time. It is not hypocritical to hate complex systems and also use them for pragmatic reasons. The difference is just that the delta is larger this time - people use AI and really hate AI. This makes perfect sense when you consider what AI is and does, especially how many different things it does.

Re: The AI Hate Progression

#86

Post by bluefirebrand »

solaire_oa wrote: post #21

For a period of time, I was graphing HN AI sentiment on BULL/BEAR LOVE/HATE axes. https://r5d.me/vibeschism/ The mania and lament continues at full speed, I suppose. And related to the brazen contempt for consent: https://r5d.me/robots.txt I like the article's sentiment, but a do-over sounds... unrealistic. Sadly, this is very common with the lamentation links, where the article accurately describes the problems at h…

The problem is what is really actionable for a lone actor, or a minority of actors?

There's really no amount of conscientious objecting or whatever that is going to penetrate the hype cycle going on

Re: The AI Hate Progression

#87

Post by happytoexplain »

altcognito wrote: post #27
pesus wrote: post #5

Good write up, and I think it accurately sums up many people's feelings about AI. One thing I would disagree with is the idea of AI getting a do over. Even if they somehow managed to do that, the idea of AI is fundamentally tainted for whole generations of people, and its reputation only gets worse every day. There's no coming back from that any time soon.

"The idea of AI is fundamentally tainted" What does this even mean? You don't like machine learning? You don't like the letters AI? There's no coming back to what? Do you work in the tech industry?

>Do you work in the tech industry?

I have for 20 years. I use AI every day. And I agree that the parent's observation is plainly true.

Your question is hideously condescending. You should examine what disconnect might be putting you in such a bitter-feeling position compared to most people on HN. This does not necessitate that you are wrong - only that you are perhaps not extending an attempt to connect with humans as much as you could.

Re: The AI Hate Progression

#88

Post by Ferret7446 »

flerchin wrote: post #6
ragequittah wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Search engine AI summaries flat out lie and deceive people all the time. What was the alternative you were using that gave you 100% accurate information before? Search engines lied all the time as well. As did news sites and any other place you could go to for information. AI just makes it easier to get the information people were already consuming.

The difference being that stupid-as website was a signal users could filter. "I found that drinking gasoline is actually medicine on 4chan.org" is vastly different than "Gemini suggests drinking gasoline as medicine." One is the open internet being dodgy, the other is google with more resources than God.

Is it though? You should treat everything you see on the Internet with equal skepticism, whether it is on ChatGPT or Reddit or even NYT.

Re: The AI Hate Progression

#89

Post by jtfrench »

What happened to the early wave of IP lawsuits against the first wave of model makers? Did anything stick/make a difference? Did _any_ frontier model company retroactively-migrate to consent-based models?
Post reply on HN