←back to thread

446 points walterbell | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
BrenBarn ◴[] No.43577934[source]
It's become almost comical to me to read articles like this and wait for the part that, in this example, comes pretty close to the beginning: "This isn’t a rant against AI."

It's not? Why not? It's a "wake-up call", it's a "warning shot", but heaven forbid it's a rant against AI.

To me it's like someone listing off deaths from fentanyl, how it's destroyed families, ruined lives, but then tossing in a disclaimer that "this isn't a rant against fentanyl". In my view, the ways that people use and are drawn into AI usage has all the hallmarks of a spiral into drug addiction. There may be safe ways to use drugs but "distribute them for free to everyone on the internet" is not among them.

replies(12): >>43577939 #>>43577996 #>>43578036 #>>43578046 #>>43578066 #>>43578099 #>>43578125 #>>43578129 #>>43578304 #>>43578770 #>>43579016 #>>43579042 #
dragonwriter ◴[] No.43578066[source]
Because "rant" is irrational, and the author wants to be seen as staking out a rational opposition.

Of course, every ranter wants to be seen that way, and so a protest that something isn't a rant against X is generally a sign that it absolutely is a rant against X that the author is pre-emptively defending.

replies(2): >>43578123 #>>43578782 #
voxl ◴[] No.43578123[source]
I've rarely read a rant that didn't consist of some good logical points
replies(2): >>43578274 #>>43578301 #
1. ◴[] No.43578274[source]