> It’s that we shouldn’t depend on AI always being available.

I made the general tech-dependence statement, but it sounds like you think it is only AI tech that shouldnt' depend on. I wouldn't worry about it; humanity has proven itself to be INCREDIBLY resilient and adaptable when the things we've come to depend on go away or change materially.

▲

hnlmorg a day ago | parent [-]

We aren’t just talking about technology, we are talking about knowledge.

Like I said, I have zero issue being “AI first”. 90% of my day-to-day is using AI. But the part I objected to in the OP was “we don’t need to know things because we have AI” (to paraphrase. So I was asking the question: what if AI goes away?

I agree humans are resilient. But that’a not a good excuse for complacency.

▲

andsoitis a day ago | parent [-]

I think open weights and local AI will distribute the knowledge across the planet, avoiding a single point of failure. All you would need is electricity and a computer. And if we have no way to access it, there will always be enough people who either have sufficient knowledge already or the hunger to rediscover things.

	▲	hnlmorg a day ago \| parent [-]
		I think we are still a long way from that becoming an option due to the cost of hardware to run even the lower end models. But I do like this prediction of yours