Genuine question. I’m not a developer, I didn’t study computer science, and I’m a pretty basic Fedora user. But why does everyone harp on Linus Torvald’s opinions like they’re handed down from heaven? Windows still dominates the market, but no one cares what Bill Gates says. I love A Song of Ice and Fire but I wouldn’t take writing tips from George R. R. Martin. Richard Stallman’s opinions on GNU/Linux are memed endlessly. Linus is literally just a dude.
Windows still dominates the market,
What market?
Desktops? Sure.
Servers? Definitely not.
Supercomputers? Like, none of them.
You should add laptops to the top of your list…cause that’s what dominates on productivity…and that’s nearly ALL windows! What I think truly dominates is an offshoot of *nix…Android and IOS. Don’t you just find it funny when you walk in a mall and see a jacked up Kiosk with a windows 10 taskbar sideways? …Press any key to reboot!
Sure buddy, ever heard of chromebooks? Macbooks? Frameworks? Any serious dev that has a choice runs linux on theirs afaik
I don’t have a personal or professional workflow that would benefit from AI. I have not been impressed with any generated art or writing (knowingly, so far). I pretty much only know it for the enshittification of search results. It might be great at coding, I’ll never know because in my first 49 years of life I’ve only needed to code enough to get a D+ in my Pascal class. It might get great at generating art but I haven’t had to generate art since my sophomore year of high school. I hear it’s good at scanning lab test results which is great for future me when I need a lab test result but doesn’t come up for me in the day-to-day. There are plenty of other useful things I’m sure it can do for other people but the stuff they say it can do for me right now is nothing I’m interested in having done for me.
It’s not great at coding. I’m on about my fifth “rewrite large system that’s a pile of AI slop” job this year, trust me.
Human slop code existed way before we had auto-complete in our IDEs, way before Copilot start writing small functions and thus bad code is not because of LLM. AI slop is no different than Human slop, it uses a shit ton of ressource to generate it and is faster at getting a working output but bad codebase is not new.
Did they make you take Pascal in school, or did you choose it and then not like it?
That’s pretty cool if it was required (or some form of programming), it is something I think everyone should at least try and be shown how it works.
My first couple of programming classes were in Pascal. Then there was the third class where the professors had written their own pseudo language that existed only on the chalkboard and in their own heads. At least I learned recursion from them. I had to teach myself every language I ever used on the job. I was EE instead of CS, so I suppose I shouldn’t complain too hard, perhaps there were more practical classes deeper into the CS tree.
Multiple Pascal classes for EE thats interesting. You’re not much older than I am and when we did Pascal my teacher said something like its not really used as much now but its a great learning language, but the 2nd class just moved onto C.
I had a friend doing EE and they had Perl as their programming class a few years later.
If I had to guess id say its Python now? That’d be practical as well.
I also leaned every language i used outside of school on my own.
I guess Linus doesn’t care about the environment or any of the other issues surrounding A.I. I’m not anti-AI just for the sake of being anti-AI. I have a huge problem with AI bcz of it’s environmental impacts, intellectual property violations, job impacts, attempts to replace all employees with AI, the general dumbing down of society and worse off the internet is bcz of AI, the surveillance state being built around it. I could go on, but you get the point. I am a staunch, no AI person bcz of all those reasons and a hundred more.
This isn’t an age thing, or a, I am getting older and Im stubborn thing. AI is literally ruining the planet and everything on it, and this guy thinks we should just accept that.
I say fuck off with that noise, I don’t have e to accept anything.
as a pro-AI, anti-cloud nerd? All of these problems disappear when we address the real problem of Capitalism.
there are abandoned tech certs for building datacenters that produce 110% of their own electricity. these are distinct from the data mines these useless nerds want to build.
without capital, the surveillance state dies.
intellectual property is a capitalist myth invented to hold us back and induce rents, and I’m tired of pretending otherwise.
oh no, you fired me from a job I’d rather not have to do and I still get to survive because we slew capitalism? ahhh, how will I cope with the blow to my identity?
there are abandoned tech certs for building datacenters that produce 110% of their own electricity.
Do you have any sources for this I could read?
search for CompTIA “GreenIT” and you may find something.
The CompTIA Green IT certification ensures knowledge and skills necessary to implement environmentally sound techniques within an organization’s IT infrastructure. The certification enhances existing IT credentials to incorporate emerging technologies that shape the global green IT industry.
As far as I can tell, this is just a (defunct) set of standards and practices for companies to follow if they want to be environmentally friendly. It doesn’t speak at all to the engineering and economic problem of how to build megawatt-scale data centers that produce more energy than they consume.
I mean we all know that driving combustion engine cars is an absolutely terrible idea and incredibly inefficient from both a physics and a societal viewpoint. Yet, even most people that accept that fact don’t go around breaking up contact with their families or boycotting any business that uses ICE cars.
Sometimes we can be loud about the terrible impacts of a technology and demand stricter regulation while also leveraging the benefits ourselves. Maybe we can do a little bit ourselves. Like not owning a car or at least an EV. Or by being considerate about token use and using smaller or even local models for the lighter tasks.
I already own an EV. And there definitely are people who are very vocal about the issues with ICE engine cars. Personally, I’d rather we go back to smaller communities within biking distance, but that’s just me.
No one driving a car today was alive when the gasoline powered car was invented, and none of the people who were were able to anticipate the terrible consequences of mass adoption of the technology.
The people driving cars today are doing so because they were born into a society that had already completely reorganized itself around cars, and that all but requires the ownership of a car to participate in that society. Meanwhile EVs have been prohibitively expensive to own for the majority of people (although that’s finally changing) and so most people who wanted an alternative did not have one available.
Contrast that situation with AI where the terrible consequences are immediately obvious, cheap alternatives already exist and have for centuries, and the “benefits” of using AI are only marginal at best and only in some niche circumstances.
Intellectual property is an imperialist tool for exploitation and oppression. I see you are a fanatic zealot defending it. And you think we should just accept that?
BTW most tokens today are sold in China and mostly and increasingly produced with nuclear or renewable energy. China is also the country with the most, fastest and most sensible regulations on AI. You’re blaming the ills of neoliberal capitalism on AI.
Therefor you are shielding capitalism from critique, and are preventing any sensible regulation on AI and any changes to the system that actually leads to our downfall. You people clearly have given up belief in democracy or revolution and just accept that this helpless and brainless zealotry is the only thing you can do now. Preach hate against your common man instead of the oppressors that make the decisions about how AI is used. So if you want to talk ethics, sniff your own butt first.
Is that really all you got from that? AI is stealing people’s art, their video games, music, etc. I’m not talking about large companies. I’m talking about Joe down the street who’s spent the last 4 years making a game, just to have an AI try to rip a slop version of his game 2 days after he released it.
I don’t give a shit about Microsoft, or any other corporation for that matter, and the fact that you came in here with this aggressive long ass rant reply to me without even so much as asking a clarifying question says more about you than it does me.
A sob story about the poor widdle smol bean petit bourgeois, making a proprietary closed source game to rent seek off of.
Why should I care about this class enemy?
You class traitors never care about actual working class people.
Dude, this isn’t a story about a closed source game dingus. Have you ever even tried to make a game? Most games can be decompiled or reverse engineered pretty easily. And as long as we live in a capitalist society, you have to play the game, even if you don’t want too.
Dunno why you come in here with comments like that…oh, a .ml account that explains it. Can’t even engage with people in good faith. Do you seriously go around calling people class traitors everywhere you go? Bcz that ain’t going to make you any friends. I am about as far left as it gets, so I find it funny that you are calling me a class traitor.
I am basically an anarchist in my political views, or a socialist, so, yeah, super funny to me to be calling me a class traitor.
Seriously? Joe down the street? Lol. That’s a myth. Poor joe down the street that this despicable Linus is trampling on! He was going to make a living with his indie game! Oh the humanity! Hahaha
It’s not a myth. It’s a huge issue people having been dealing with in the Indie dev space, which you would know if you were a game developer. Anyway, I’m done here. You’re either a bot, or an extremely unpleasant person, and I don’t have the mental energy to engage with either today.
bot
Scratch a copyright advocate, and a dehumanizer bleeds.
BASED LINUS
Yeah dude licking corporate boot is so based
If you’re too much of a black/white thinker to be able to have an intelligent and mature conversation, there is nothing I can say to change your emotional response.
With that being said: Fuck big tech, fuck how AI is being used by it and large companies. Period. Full stop.
This current iteration of AI would not be possible without big tech. If you actually thought about it for more than five minutes you would realize you cannot reconcile those two and still see LLMs as “just a tool”. Sit on that one for a minute. Utilitarianism rots your brain.
You’re not wrong with a lot of the substance there, but big tech doesnt own the corpus of AI, and it most certainly will still be around even if you were to dump all of big tech (which I am very much for…!)
I’m not into utilitarianism, just trying to be pragmatic here and not jump on the strong emotional reaction train… Unfortunately, LLMs are really useful tooling …and they simply are not going to go anywhere, so I like to direct efforts to responsible governance, not mob mentality campism.
Shit no go bakie in horsie, lets put the onus and responsibility on the individual and produce better guidelines.
When the topic is AI, the quality of some of these Lemmy threads drops down to the level of YouTube comments.
Vague criticisms, fallacious reasoning, highly emotive language, little response to attempts at discussion (though some might engage in disingenuous discussions of shifting goalposts here and there to discourage particularly vocal engagees from future participation). So I’d say that Linus is just the latest convenient scapegoat in an Anti-AI ‘trend’ that will have little impact on the rate of AI adoption in the long run.
Sucks that I waited until now to try to form a measured opinion on AI because now all the discussions on the internet are hot garbage.
Measured perspectives are hard to come by. A Marxist Perspective On AI
There’s nothing Marxist in that article. Only fallacies from rich white man ranting about people pushing back against fascism.
People say AI to mean LLM first because main stream western, fascist, media pushed the term by inviting exclusively non-expert and CEOs to talk about the subject. People are pushing back against a product that is mean to make workers dull and replace them by
stealing their works even by capitalist standards-> exploiting their works, appropriating it to themselves without any compensation nor permission.The article tried to paint the discussion as anti-llm would be anti technology, which is not Marxist in any way and not relevant. Weirdly enough fascist guy like the one on this article don’t talk about cryptocurrency as something we should chill for. Isn’t it a tool too?
Current LLM chill is the opposite of dialectical materialism: what is the concrete analysis here? LLM outputed nothing of value for years despite the hundred of billions invested. Worst it actually participate to global warming, bourgeoisie attempt to mass control, getting rid of workers and inflating computer costs. So the real consequences for people are losses only.
And for what? To get to have unskilled rich white people who can afford the awfully hight price of LLM to boats about “I made this” while it is actually made from steal and empoverish people and enriching tech lord’s.
So no, thanks, and trying to paint fallacies to Marxism isn’t going to help either.
EDIT: replace the “stealing” argument as pointed out -> https://lemmy.ml/post/54102413/28384201 , this can be confusing with the anti-piracy propaganda vocabulary.
stealing
Stealing: when you don’t have it anymore afterwards.
Copying: when both have it afterwards
The RIAA’s propaganda campaign was sadly very successful.
Actually let me analyze again your comment here: I thought you were right at first but thinking about it not really.
First let me address : I didn’t know about RIAA, this kind of paternalistic way of addressing people is not good in any way. We aren’t all USA-centric (like you?).
Then about the “steal” argument:
- it is a vocabulary used for century by Marxist organizations about the value taken by the bourgeoisie from the proletariat work.
- the argument of “copying is OK” is missing the point : any FOSS dev/organization I know would gladly give their work to you, individual. But not to big tech to commercialize it and make extreme amount of money, as well as steering conversation towards fascism in the process. While also having an amazingly big impact on the environment.
- “both have it afterwards” is also a fallacy : any work done on computer can be seen like this : if your an accountant and you boss copy your accounting sheets and do not pay you, it is not stealing? You both have the file, for you it won’t make you any money, he will. Big tech taking FOSS code for their profit is not piracy as of individual accessing cultural product they cannot afford in the first place. And if you make profit from piracy this is a whole other discussion I would gladly here your thoughts about it.
Downloading this comment is not authorized.
Then about the “steal” argument:
You wouldn’t download an argument, would you? Or would you? What, you’re reading this in your browser without authorization from me?? FBI, open up!!!
are you trolling?
I checked your history and you seems to genuinely interact but you’re sentence makes no real argument (more like a joke).
But maybe you haven’t read the rest of the conversation so here some points:
- You can and are encourage to download and use free software. Same with comments.
- You are not allowed to monetized free software (hence the GPL v2 vs v3 debate). To be honest also with my comments.
- The term stealing could indeed be confused with the modern usage of fascists who want to fight against piracy but it was used for a good century by communist to talk about capitalists stealing surplus value made by workers.
I got banned from the Fuck AI community for saying Linus isn’t stupid. Not that he’s right on AI, just that he’s not stupid.
Indeed, the atmosphere is toxic.
We’re on a site where people happily discuss their arr stack or transpiring the PS5 system, but bemoan AI is killing artists and coding.
There are real ethical issues, job impacts, environmental issues, property rights issues (real and intellectual), privacy, a stack of cards economy etc.
But there is also utility, and frankly the genie is out of the bottle. For better or worse.
Catching kernel bugs in Linux with AI should be seen as a good because they’re not being exploited offensively by private actors. AI review that catches the most annoying 80% of errors or issues saves human time, while not contributing slop to the kernel.
There is a lot to discuss if you show up in good faith.
Also, Linus is an asshole. Why would anyone be surprised he reacted like an asshole? His point on his expectations is actually clear and sensible to me. He probably could have said just that, but he’s an asshole, and acting how you would expect after a bunch of people are yelling at him.
Nuance is a hard concept to get in most Lemmy comment threads. It’s obvious it’s just a tool that uses an insane amount of resources that can do some good in certain applications. The problem stems from it being abused for evil and stupid things.
Can AI be used to help flag cancerous growths in x rays and help save lives? Absolutely! Can it also be used to track every human being on the planet for surveillance purposes while its proponents build massive biome-destroying data centers to act as the infrastructure? It sure can!
All that said, I still don’t feel confident about rolling in AI code to open source projects when bots aren’t accountable to their contributions. They should require a huge amount of oversight which I doubt is happening at the moment.
I want to expand on your first thought and just say that in my experience the internet as a whole is not a great place for nuanced takes, and I’ve noticed that becoming mirrored in reality over the last decade. Perhaps its been happening for longer.
There’s so much going on, and so many actors trying to influence the masses. I don’t blame anyone for having different conclusions to my own, there’s an almost untrackable amount of sources to draw information (and disinformation) from. I just hope we can get to a point together where we can (again?) discuss nuance without ceding to emotion.
I would like to reiterate that posting on main as an admin is obnoxious since we can’t block you.
Consider using an alt to post unless performing official instance actions.
Button is right there man
I would like to reiterate that posting on main as an admin is obnoxious since we can’t block you.
If you can’t block me, that’s an issue with your Lemmy client, because the default web client isn’t stopping you.
You’re wrong: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/6706
AI is just a tool, the user of a tool should be competent enough to use it properly
My calculator can do math for me, but I need to know how to use the calculator, the operations, rules in math, and basically, well, know math. My calculator is a good tool.
“IA” can “craft” a magic result without you needing to known anything about what the tool is helping you to accomplish. In a perfect world IA can be used to automate the most tedious part of any job (scaffolding, auto generated code for APIs, color grading, laso tool, etc) but in this world people use it as an excuse to not learn what they are trying to do. “IA” is a bad tool. Is not helping you, is doing it for you.
Never in human kind has existed a “tool” that does things for you without the need of any input or knowledge of the tool itself. “Engineer” comes from “who operates the machine”, “IA” operates itself. I don’t think there exist a real comparison with that “IA” does, but it’s effects are clear, and are not good.
I can think of plenty of tools that will do something for you even if you understand nothing about the tool, how it works, or the domains it is helfpul with.
I can plug a drill in a socket, put a random bit on and drill a hole without any knowledge of how a drill is supposed to work. But my hole won’t be straight, will be too deep ir too shallow, too large or too small, and I might have drilled straight into a pipe. I don’t understand how drilling works, I still drilled, but the outcome is shit.
I can mix a bunch of flour, eggs, sugar and chocolate in a bowl, then put it in an oven at max temperature on a random heat method and wait half a day. I’ll have a bunch of coal, not a cake. I used an oven without any idra how an oven works, it did something for me. It’s shit, but it did something for me.
Anyone can put the key in a car and start pressing random pedals to figure out how it works. Eventually anyone will get it… If you’re not dead before then or you didn’t total your car. Without understanding anything about a car, I did manage to move it and go somewhere. But I damaged some things in the way.
I could go on and on with as many tools as you want. But I doubt you’ll keep reading.
LLMs in software development are the same: If you understand how to steer it, if you understand software engineering, it will have fantastic results. If you don’t, it will have shit results. The only difference is that it is much harder to understand the insides of how an LLM model works, as that is another specialty. But just like you don’t need to understand how an oven actually works to use it, you don’t need to understand how an LLM actually works to use it.
Edit: Another great example is a camera. Anyone can take a picture, but without a good understanding of photography, most people’s pictures will be shit. And the vast majority of users do not understand and do not hace the knowledge to understand how a camera works.
It’s perfectly ok to use a new tool to do your work faster, more efficiently, and with greater precision if these improvements are justified by the cost of the tool. But if that tool is a coal-fired, water hoarding, ophan crushing, billionaire-owned kleptobot, your results need to be better than pure gold to be worth the true cost of using it.
Weird, i disagree with Linus.
AI is not a tool. Its an addiction. Maybe the first dozen times (more likely: never) you use it “as a tool”. Very quickly, you depend on it. You need it to refactor. Then you need it to debug. Then you need it to write. Next thing you know, you spend 0 time writing code (the fun part) and 100% of your time as a reviewer (the worst part). Suddenly it isnt fun. A few fools even get TWO AI MODELS, one to write, the other to debug.
Its a virus. I cannot tell you how many 300+ line commits ive rejected because they straight up dont do what the person said they do or also do some extremely asinine 2nd thing that breaks other pieces of code (which they would know if theyd actually used it).
A tool requires input. A hammer can never do anything i dont explicitly tell it to do. A good word editor does exactly what i want it to do. A good compiler does exactly what it says it will do. AI does not. Ai is a glorified autocomplete, and i dont want my code to be automatically generated. Its asking for thousands of issues down the line. If AI was any good, Windows would be a usable platform by now.
Dont get me wrong; i know that it is sometimes used as a tool by people, and meticulously checked over, but more often than not, it isnt.
I think AI is a tool but very advanced tool. AI is great tool but very unpredictable in many cases. I think it should be used because it makes coding more effective but as you say it kill every fun in coding. As Linus said tool is not important if code is great. If you used AI and its good then why not. Sometimes you can write worse code then AI. But on other side yes it can be hard for repository owners when they must reject tons of shit code created with AI. So it have advantages and disadvantages and when do you want some fun (or maybe some security stuff) don’t use it.
An unpredictable tool is a useless tool. A hammer does what it says it will: apply force at the head. AI straight up lies, is objectively wrong, or doesnt work. Thats a garbage tool.
Eventually youre going to ask it to do something you dont know how to do, and you wont be able to fact check it. Thats when the harm happens (or just mild inconvenience, but in my professional case, harm).
If the linux kernel breaks due to a bug introduced by AI or built on a pile of code no one truly understands, we’re set back anyways. Better to avoid that and make sure all code is human written/understood
Yes its hard to work with unpredictable tool but not every AI is completely unpredictable, it can be only bad prompt or stupid model or something similar but that is problem for people who use AI (or use AI incorrectly). If you want use AI you must force AI to do what you want and this is part of doing things with AI. If you don’t want this you shouldnt use AI.
I think its not “AI is stupid shit” or “AI is awesome, it can do things faster”. Its something between. For some case is AI good like for brainstorming but for others not like psychology but this is very questionable…
This is really an ignorant and arrogant take at AI.
I’m kind of gobsmacked by this. I’ve heard younger developers compare LLM with compiler and chalked it up to ignorance, but I don’t get what this is.
Can I write code in assembly? Yes. Of course. It’s true that I never do it, but if there was a rule that you needed to write some assembly now and then to certify as a kernel developer I don’t see how it would be any kind of impediment.
Comparing more directly: if you hand me a compiled binary and the source code and ask “why is the bit at address 0xXXXXXXXXX a 0?” I can, with 100% certainty, answer that. Probably in less than a day of effort. If I ask "why did the LLM output “for” as the XXXXth word of its utterance, can Linus say why?
And “can you write a good commit message without an editor?” Uhhh? At least when I was in school, this was something people did for fun/messing around. I still do
cat > somefilewhen I need to put some quick text together. In fact, Claude will sometimes write a Git commit by cat-ing into a file–which it’s doing because there’s so many online examples of this. Fucking weird things for Linus to pick. Makes me think his brain’s rotted.I like Linus, but comparing an LLM to a compiler is fucking stupid.
Why?
You can predict with certainty what a compilers output would be. Linus is conflating the fact that most people don’t understand how a compiler converts higher level programming language into machine code with the reality that no one can actually predict and audit what an LLM puts out.
You cannot, that’s why reproducible builds are hard. Modern compiler are made with compilers (egg/chicken problem) not assembly nor machine code and you always loose some perfect prediction.
Yes LLMs are less predictible than compiler but their output is readable to human, while machine code is very hard (yet not impossible).
Is that a bad things that 99% of devs have forgot how to write code cutting holes in paper? Tools are changing and while a direct comparison between the move from paper to COBOL or assembly to C is not the same as python to LLM generated it’s hard to deny that LLM will change how human write code.
Thanks for that explanation. Are you saying that if I rebuild the exact same code on the same machine I could get different results for a given compiler? I think this would render solutions like docker useless. Could you elaborate?
Yes you can get a different result. Compilers are designed to be deterministic, but a build is more than the compiler. Usually the bytes differ but the behavior is identical.
Docker is far from being reproducible!
It works on my machine ≠ reproducible. But reproducible will make it works on your machine.
Using a compiler does not guarantee you to get byte-perfect output each time, especially not on different machines.
Talk about misleading. The differences are timestamps and metadata, and some compilers have flags to let you zero out timestamps and force it to produce a bit-for-bit identical file every time.
Yeah, but your compiler wasn’t made with massive copyright infringement, stealing much needed water and rampant corruption, was it?
His line seems to be ‘don’t submit shit code.’
Even if you wrote it by seance with a Oujii board, just make sure it works, and that great grandma Ada agrees to a GPL license.
The comparison between AI and compilers is kind of stupid though. When you program in a given language, you’re writing out the entire logic and behavior of your program. Not to mention that the compiler is a deterministic machine, it will always behave in a certain manner and produce predictable results. On the other hand, using AI, you just write a sentence. Then it “creates” a whole bunch of code that will not always be the same, even if you always use the same model and prompt. Not to mention all of the detrimental effects AI has, cognitively speaking, when you start to rely on it. On top of this, all AI models were trained on unfathomable amounts of stolen information.
Compilers are not always deterministic, there is a lot of “smart” code in compilers to automatically optimize code and that can mean that whole parts or functions are replaced with what the compiler thinks is best.
Devil’s advocating for the sense of completeness here rather than bickering, but wouldn’t two of the same compiler on two of the same machine with the same code still create the same output? That is to say, it is deterministic rather than stochastic but it just takes unpredictable variables into account when compiling?
I think the difference would be that a compiler will always give you something understandable and explainable even if it’s opaque, but an LLM is literally using RNG to generate its output, so could come out with something completely left field. If it switches to Chinese that’s one thing because you can just ignore that, but equally a hallucinated bug that looks right but is actually very dangerous could slip in instead.
RNG is pseudorandom. Every computer program is deterministic in some sense, even if the seed is obfuscated or dependent on ephermal environment variables. Being able to predict the output is very different from determinism.
Cory Doctorow’s “Reverse Centaurs Guide to Life After AI” has a short section that pertains to this. He talks about how someone like Linus essentially doesn’t have a boss and has untold resources for whatever “AI” “tools” he finds useful.
He isn’t ever forced to use the wrong tool for the job or use a tool that simply doesn’t do what his boss thinks it does. He doesn’t have to worry about getting fired or his coworkers getting fired because his boss was sold a story about reducing labor costs with this cool new “tool”. He simply uses what’s useful to him with the probably millions of dollars of compute made available to him by the tech giants.
95% of people don’t have that luxury. They have a boss itching to get rid of them or 10x their workload with the help of the “tool” that Linus is so happily and defiantly praising on behalf of the monopolists.
I don’t see how this means he’s wrong though, if people are hating AI as a proxy for hating their abusive relationship with their employer, that doesn’t seem like a strong argument that everyone who isn’t in that situation must also hate AI.
It doesn’t mean he’s wrong! it means he’s out of touch and doing the propaganda work of capital for free much like many other self-employed/business owning/petit-borgeois people who think they’re on the side of capital.
It also means that his praise for and indeed positive experience with this “tool” is largely irrelevant to the broader social/economic discourse surrounding so called AI.
Blind hatred for AI as a technology is inherantly reactionary, but that doesn’t mean that the implementation of the technology today isn’t problematic in many ways.
Strangely idgaf about whether he respects me
I don’t think he thinks about you at all
👍🏻 The vast majority of people don’t.
