> I don’t think it’s only that. I personally hate AI not because of CEOs and co, but because the tech is intrinsically born out of theft, and is still, to this day, evolving thanks to theft. And that’s even before the ecological considerations.

I also hate it because:

1) Fundamentally, it's about reducing the power of labor (which are what the vast majority of people are) and I know I'm a laborer. This is why the CEOs and wealthy are excited about it.

2) It's about automating the engaging and creative knowledge work, and leaving the humans with manual labor and drudgery.

▲

WorldMaker 13 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

2.5) It's not even about automating the engaging and creative work well. Code generated with LLMs are "Day 1 Legacy Code" with all sorts of tech debt liabilities from the very first generation. Art made with it is often "good enough" but rarely escapes the uncanny valley and succeeds at its creative goals. Technical writing made with it is "mansplaining as a service", often pompous and confident but low in nutritional value (and factual value). Creative writing made with it is repetitive, rambling, and frequently nonsensical, is terrible at metaphors and similes, is all exposition and almost no narrative arc, is bad at nuance and equally bad at overt messaging.

3) As a human, I don't just hate that C-Suites think they can replace my and my colleagues' creative output with LLMs, I dread the world where LLM-first creative content is ubiquitous because it will be a world of increasingly less substance/nutrition/taste/texture/other human metaphors.

▲

senderista an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What new technology does not reduce the power of labor in some way?

	▲	jononor an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Communication tech/tools enable more people to collaborate. It increases ability for labor that is far away from high value markets to contribute. Same goes for shipping tech wrt physical goods. On the global scale that is empowering the labor class. Any productivity tool that individual laborers can purchase also (and that still needs the worker) is probably good for labor, overall.

▲

satvikpendem an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

If you're a programmer or (physical) engineer you've been automating other people's labor all this time, it's ironically hypocritical that now that engineers are the ones being automated that they cry foul.

	▲	WorldMaker 6 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I left one employer in part because I thought some of their automation of almost-but-not-quite minimum wage jobs was unethical to me. In Software, we don't have an industry-wide ethics board that people trust, so the complaints about individual automations remain quieter and personal. It is entirely possible for people in these conversations to not be "hypocritical" in their relationship to this topic versus their personal ethics. It's definitely hypocritical at the "industry ethics" level, but again we don't have an ethics board and all we have are personal and public opinions. (Arguably this is one of the current problems with AI is that there is no ethics board for software so instead we must debate this in the court of public opinion, such as HN comments.)