> It is there to reduce our agency, to make it easier to fire us, to put us in even more precarious position

Could be. It could also end up freeing us from every commercial dependency we have. Write your own OS, your own mail app, design your own machinery to farm with.

It’s here, so I don’t know where you’re going with “I’m unhappy this is happening and someone should do something”

▲ wolvesechoes 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> It could also end up freeing us from every commercial dependency we have

Yeah, companies that develop and push this tech definitely have this in mind.

> I don’t know where you’re going with “I’m unhappy this is happening and someone should do something

I am not surprised because I didn't write anything like it.

	▲	margalabargala an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> > I don’t know where you’re going with “I’m unhappy this is happening and someone should do something > I am not surprised because I didn't write anything like it. You're right, there was no "someone should do something" call to action in your original comment.

▲ idopmstuff 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's also worth nothing that the "our" in that sentence is just SWEs, who are a pretty small group in the grand scheme of things. I recognize that's a lot of HN, but still bears considering in terms of the broader impact outside of that group.

I'm a small business owner, and AI has drastically increased my agency. I can do so much more - I've built so many internal tools and automated so many processes that allow me to spend my time on things I care about (both within the business but also spending time with my kids).

It is, fortunately, and unfortunately, the nature of a lot of technology to disempower some people while making lives better for others. The internet disempowered librarians.

	▲	wolvesechoes 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> It's also worth nothing that the "our" in that sentence is just SWEs It isn't, it just a matter of seeing ahead of the curve. Delegating stuff to AI and agents by necessity leads to atrophy of skills that are being delegated. Using AI to write code leads to reduced capability to write code (among people). Using AI for decision-making reduces capability for making decisions. Using AI for math reduces capability for doing math. Using AI to formulate opinions reduces capability to formulate opinions. Using AI to write summaries reduces capability to summarize. And so on. And, by nature, less capability means less agency. Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them Not to mention utilizing AI for control, spying, invigilation and coercion. Do I need to explain how control is opposed to agency?

▲ LetsGetTechnicl 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

  It could also end up freeing us from every commercial dependency we have. Write your own OS, your own mail app, design your own machinery to farm with.

Lmfao LLM's can barely count rows in a spreadsheet accurately, this is just batshit crazy.

edit: also the solution here isn't that every one writes their own software (based on open source code available on the internet no doubt) we just use that open source software, and people learn to code and improve it themselves instead of off-loading it to a machine

▲

margalabargala an hour ago | parent [-]

This is one of those things where people who don't know how to use tools think they're bad, like people who would write whole sentences into search engines in the 90s.

LLMs are bad at counting the number of rows in a spreadsheet. LLMs are great at "write a Python script that counts the number of rows in this spreadsheet".

▲

teolandon an hour ago | parent [-]

Do you think asking any LLM in the next 100 years to "write a Python script that generates an OS" will work?

▲

antonyh 39 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Yes, for some definition of OS. It could build a DOS-like or other TUI, or a list of installed apps that you pick from. Devices are built on specifications, so that's all possible. System API it could define and refine as it goes. General utilities like file management are basically a list of objects with actions attached. And so on... the more that is rigidly specified, the better it will do.

It'll fail miserably at making it human-friendly though, and attempt to pilfer existing popular designs. If it builds a GUI, it's be a horrible mashup of Windows 7/8/10/11, various versions of OSX / MacOS, iOS, and Android. It won't 'get' the difference between desktop, laptop, mobile, or tablet. It might apply HIG rules, but that would end up with a clone at best.

In short, it would most likely make something technically passable but nightmareish to use.

	▲	margalabargala 4 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Given 100 years though? 100 years ago we barely had vacuum tubes and airplanes. Given a century the only unreasonable part is oneshotting with no details, context, or follow up questions. If you tell Linus Torvalds "write a python script that generates and OS", his response won't be the script, it'll be "who are you and how did you get into my house".

▲

margalabargala 20 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Considering how simple "an OS" can be, yes, and in the 2020s.

If you're expecting OSX, AI will certainly be able to make that and better "in the next 100 years". Though perhaps not oneshotting off something as vague as "make an OS" without followup questions about target architecture and desired features.

▲ ModernMech an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

What happens when they decide it's a national security threat and an act of domestic terrorism to use AI to undermine commercial dependencies? We're all acting like AI isn't being invented within the context of and used by a fascist regime.