So you advocate for using AI to develop new drugs? Study weather patterns? Assist in physics and material sciences? Assist with coding? Are you saying pro-AI people think all AI should be embraced at every level, and replace humans?
Did you rely on AI to help you understand my comment?
The point is that calling it an “anti-AI movement”, is like saying there’s an anti shit eating movement. Yes, there are some weirdos being an exception, but apart from that it’s just humanity as a whole.
And I reject that premise entirely, which is why I asked directly whether or not you supported the usage of AI I listed. Because from what I have seen, people who reject AI do so wholesale, with no regard to how it is being used. That’s what I mean by the Anti-AI movement, not that you have a club and meetings.
I am not defending your bosses use of AI to vibecode, but that has absolutely nothing to do with what OP posted.
So are you condemning an entire technology and field of research on the grounds of the worst examples, or do you support the usage of AI in the fields I mentioned?
Since we’re rejecting premises, logic rejects this premise. And I reject the premise of me guiding you to a place where it makes sense. Just talk to Grok instead, it will give you the positive affirmation you seek.
I’ve never spoken to Grok in my life, but you seem disinterested in having an honest conversation about this while accusing me of being a shill or stupid. Precisely the tendency I named in my first message. I reject the premise that AI is pure shit, which you snuck in when comparing what I called the anti-AI movement to an anti-eating-shit movement. But you have not even tried to tell me why AI is shit, in the context of being used to improve weather prediction, and develop new drugs. I’m happy to hear why I’m wrong, but are you willing to actually talk about it, or do you just want to insult me?
You really think other people are stupid, eh? It’s fairly obvious that someone who on purpose doesn’t grasp the point that [there is no movement if it’s just humanity + exceptions prove the rule], and just tries to drag you elsewhere, never WANTED an honest conversation.
But you know who will gladly accept your BS, and give you the positive answers you seek? LLMs. That’s why I tried to redirect you there.
pro-ai people are either already delusional, or they are corporate executives which categorically position them to be a priori delusional to ever land in such a job position.
Pro-AI folks are useless in the thinking department, so of course they want to force it into everything - to lay off folks, to cut costs on security and quality, and to generate short-term profits and then fuck off once the bubble inevitably buckles under the weight of reality.
Okay, then you don’t actually understand my position at all. Would you rather tell me what I believe, and reinforce my assertion that you’re misinformed. Or would you like to actually understand my position, and destroy the strawman that you have built?
So you advocate for using AI to develop new drugs? Study weather patterns? Assist in physics and material sciences? Assist with coding? Are you saying pro-AI people think all AI should be embraced at every level, and replace humans?
Did you rely on AI to help you understand my comment?
The point is that calling it an “anti-AI movement”, is like saying there’s an anti shit eating movement. Yes, there are some weirdos being an exception, but apart from that it’s just humanity as a whole.
And I reject that premise entirely, which is why I asked directly whether or not you supported the usage of AI I listed. Because from what I have seen, people who reject AI do so wholesale, with no regard to how it is being used. That’s what I mean by the Anti-AI movement, not that you have a club and meetings.
I am not defending your bosses use of AI to vibecode, but that has absolutely nothing to do with what OP posted.
So are you condemning an entire technology and field of research on the grounds of the worst examples, or do you support the usage of AI in the fields I mentioned?
Since we’re rejecting premises, logic rejects this premise. And I reject the premise of me guiding you to a place where it makes sense. Just talk to Grok instead, it will give you the positive affirmation you seek.
I’ve never spoken to Grok in my life, but you seem disinterested in having an honest conversation about this while accusing me of being a shill or stupid. Precisely the tendency I named in my first message. I reject the premise that AI is pure shit, which you snuck in when comparing what I called the anti-AI movement to an anti-eating-shit movement. But you have not even tried to tell me why AI is shit, in the context of being used to improve weather prediction, and develop new drugs. I’m happy to hear why I’m wrong, but are you willing to actually talk about it, or do you just want to insult me?
You really think other people are stupid, eh? It’s fairly obvious that someone who on purpose doesn’t grasp the point that [there is no movement if it’s just humanity + exceptions prove the rule], and just tries to drag you elsewhere, never WANTED an honest conversation.
But you know who will gladly accept your BS, and give you the positive answers you seek? LLMs. That’s why I tried to redirect you there.
pro-ai people are either already delusional, or they are corporate executives which categorically position them to be a priori delusional to ever land in such a job position.
Pro-AI folks are useless in the thinking department, so of course they want to force it into everything - to lay off folks, to cut costs on security and quality, and to generate short-term profits and then fuck off once the bubble inevitably buckles under the weight of reality.
Okay, then you don’t actually understand my position at all. Would you rather tell me what I believe, and reinforce my assertion that you’re misinformed. Or would you like to actually understand my position, and destroy the strawman that you have built?