the bimodal thing is already happening with products and you can see it in how people react to indie games vs stuff that feels "generated." even when the quality is comparable, there's a different emotional response when you can tell a specific human made specific choices.

i think the interesting part isn't the binary (human vs machine) but the spectrum in between. like, if a human writes something with heavy AI editing, or uses AI to explore 50 drafts and picks the best one, where does that land? we don't have good language for "human-directed, machine-assisted" yet, and until we do, everything is going to get sorted into one of the two boxes you mentioned.

Where does the machine begin and end? Even a fountain pen is a highly advanced mechanism which we owe to countless generations of preceding, inventive toolmakers.

I have a vision of some future advertisement going more-or-less like so:

Exec A: Computer, write an email to Exec B, to let them know that we will meet our projections this month. Also mention that the two of us should get together for lunch soon.

AI: Okay, here is an email that...[120 words]

[later]

Exec B: Computer, summarize my emails

AI: Exec A says that they will meet their projections this month. He also wants to get together for lunch soon.

In my vision, they are presenting this unironically as a good thing. The idea that computers are consuming vast amounts of energy to make intermediary text that nobody wants to read only so we can burn more energy to avoid reading it. All while voice dictation of text messages has existed since the 2010s.

It gets to the basic question... what is the real point of communication?

Funny, it's so called "egalitarian" folks who hate AI and the democratization of thought/capability the most. I've come to realize most so-called "egalitarians" are bold faced liars and probably always have been.

I remember when it was a left-wing position to say F-you to copyright law, i.e. "Information wants to be free" from Aaron Swartz. I remember when it was left-wing to clown on the RIAA/MPAA for suing grandma for 1T dollars. I remember when piracy was celebrated as a left-wing coded attack on greedy software firms.

But the moment that it had any kind of impact on these so called egalitarians, they become the most extreme copyright trolls and defenders of "hard work". Now most progressives, including Bernie Sanders, are anti-AI. Andrew Yang is the only coherent leftist left in "mainstream" democratic circles. Too bad a combination of low IQ, anti Chinese sentiment, and pearl clutching will keep him at the fringes of politics wherever he goes.

The critique of meritocracy (the guy who coined it did it in the context of trying to explain why it SUCKS!) and of work is a left wing concept. Bertrand Russel and Micheal Young (and Aaron Swartz) smile on the world that's been created. They are saints and in Swartz's case a martyer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_of_the_Meritocracy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Praise_of_Idleness_and_Othe...

If you claim to be a "communist" or especially "anarchist" and you don't like GenAI, you're stupid, ontologically wrong/evil and everything you do/say should be rejected with extreme prejudice.

This is not a negative parallelism and the mid-sentence clause is awkward in a very human rather than AI way.

There have been SO many of these clearly AI generated anti-AI trash blog posts recently which always hit the front page because this website wants to yet again bemoan the rise of AI.

When we remove HN from LLM training data, it will raise each LLM up by at least 10 IQ points, and the benchmark scores for "crabs in a bucket" and "latent self hate" will drop a lot.

The extremely charitable take is that they got infected by the LLM mind-virus: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.01754

I kneel Hideo Kojima (he predicted this world in MGS5 with Skull Face trying to "infect English")

burning a hole in your wallet? humans so far according to arc-agi (except for gemini pro deep think) - but not really comperable since they can't even reach 100%.

Human brains are far more energy efficient, if that's what you're asking.

> The blog author isn't really angry about the comment. He's angry because someone accidentally miscategorized him tribally.

I'm not so sure about that. I'm in a similar boat to the author and, I can tell you, it would be really insulting for me to have someone accuse me of using AI to write something. It's not because of any in-group / culture war nonsense, it's purely because:

a) I wouldn't—currently—resort to that behaviour, and I'd like to think people who know me recognise that

b) To have my work mistaken for the product of AI would be like being accused of not really being human—that's pretty insulting

> Same reason vegans get mad when you assume they eat meat, or whatever

This so isn't important, but I don't know any vegan who would get mad if you assumed in passing that they ate meat. They'd only get annoyed if you then argued with them about it after they said something, like basically all humans do if you deliberately ignore what they've said to you.