As is often repeated here, "technology is a force multiplier".

AI has been multiplying the wrong things (for the common people) at an amazing rate, while the good things it multiplies have been few, arguable, and lagging behind.

Usually to be enthusiastic about new tech, it needs to be the reverse. New tech that multiplies the "good things" first while the wrong things catch up later (see Internet, cars, commercial aviation, smartphones).

Sure, fellow software engineers who spend 8+ hours a day writing code see it as the opposite, since AI _is_ seen as doing the "good things" (i.e. writing code). But eventually the bad things will catch up with us too.

▲

solenoid0937 3 hours ago | parent [-]

The general public has never been enthusiastic about new tech until well after the benefits start rolling in and are undeniably obvious. https://pessimistsarchive.org/

AI is no different. People like to think they have some special new insight as to why "it's bad this time!" but the average person has always reacted to change with FUD.

▲

acdha 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The difference is that previous technology like the internet or later the web had benefits which were obvious much faster. The average person is hearing about AI from their boss saying anyone who doesn’t use it will be laid-off sooner, not from their buddy talking about how much time they saved sending email instead of postal mail or doing their shopping online instead of driving around or mail order. Not everyone instantly jumped on those, either, but the pull was attraction rather than coercion.

▲

Ar-Curunir 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Usually this happens after the naysayers have been forcibly evicted from economic and social life

▲

solenoid0937 3 hours ago | parent [-]

And look at how far we have come. We are all the better off for it, by nearly every objective QoL measurement there is.

	▲	ares623 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I, too, love big brother.