I 'oppose' Ai for exactly the reasons parent mentions, seems like most common folks over long term will lose much more than they could ever gain from it. Societal loss by definition, on massive scale.

Don't reduce opposition to something you like to some primitive irrational luddites, thats cheap and doesn't represent reality.

I respectfully disagree. Everyone I speak to in my circle, as well as in HN oppose AI because it is sold as much more capable than it actually is.

I asked ChatGPT to sample comments in HN without bias and find out which mode of opposition is more popular. Here's what it said

https://chatgpt.com/share/6abf5e0e-c45c-83eb-a3f6-b676b08f13...

>“AI is overhyped or less useful than claimed” was substantially more prevalent than “AI is genuinely capable and will take people’s jobs.” That held across two random samples of recent HN comments.

To steel-man your position, it is true that Bernie Sanders also opposes AI because it can cause automation. And that my bubble in tech might be biased because it consists of a certain kind of cynical person to think of everything as hype.

I wouldn't take that as a given. We don't know how AI will play out or how it will transform our lives. We could look to the industrial revolution to make a prediction, but the political, social and technological conditions today are hard to compare with those of Victorian England.

What AI lacks, I think, is a positive vision. The narrative is dictated by a small Silicon Valley subculture that unfortunately also happens to be a doomsday cult, and it is amplified by a media landscape hungry for the next clickbait headline.

By contrast, people in China seem a lot more relaxed and optimistic about AI. There are worries there too, but not to the same extent as in the West.