I hate it with a burning passion. It causes irreparable climate harm, including self-hosted models (consider where they're trained); it infringes copyright (and they're destroying rare books to feed it‽‽‽); it's causing psychosis in some people, leading them to harm themselves and others; and it's destroying a lot of people's critical thinking skills (which I think is the goal: commodify intelligence, though maybe it's to replace the working-class itself).
Sorry for the massive block of text lol, I just really, really don't like it.
Oh, also (very anectdotal), it seems that on the Venn diagram of anti-fascist and anti-"AI", the anti-"AI" circle is almost entirely contained within the anti-fascist circle. Just an observation.
Disclaimer: machine learning is not the same as "AI" (LLMs, presented as beings capable of thought). I think ML has a lot of interesting applications, and I'm actually rather fascinated by it.
machine learning is not the same as “AI” (LLMs, presented as beings capable of thought)
(insert nerd face) LLMs are a kind of machine learning algorithm. AI is actually a superset of ML, in fact pretty much all computer programs count as AI. (a lot of old computer science departments were once called AI research departments in stead)
The phrase "AI", as promoted by tech bros, however, should be considered seperately to the correct definition: I agree that software is generally harmful when presented this way by its creators.
This kind seems like it's basically what I said? I think there's too much ambiguity around the term "artifical intelligence". When I said "AI" (with quotation marks), I was referring to the tech bros' "gen-AI".
I disagree, however, with the idea that artificial intelligence is superset of machine-learning. While all computers were once considered a form of artificial intelligence, the same cannot be said now.
The idea of artificial intelligence is quite nebulous. I can't recall the source, but I've heard that even the loom was once considered to be akin to the human brain. Honestly, I think humans just like comparing new technology to our brains, and we'll eventually move past referring to machine-learning as artificial intelligence.
(machine learning) is not the same as (“AI” (LLMs, presented as beings capable of thought))
(aka LLMs aren't ML) rather than
machine learning is not the same as “AI” e.g. (LLMs, presented as beings capable of thought)
(aka LLMs are ML, and when presented as a replacement for humans they are AI)
Either way, I believe there is some value in comparing even simple decision making technology to the human brain. After all, we are capable of making those sorts of decisions as well. Tbf I may be biased by my internal mental model of coding, where I imagine describing a set of steps, relations, abstractions, etc to an entity with an extremely direct manner of interpretation.
My personal moral of (seemingly malicious) language ambiguity is to avoid the term AI altogether.
My personal moral of (seemingly malicious) language ambiguity is to avoid the term AI altogether.
Oh, it's definitely malicious.
Tbf I may be biased by my internal mental model of coding, where I imagine describing a set of steps, relations, abstractions, etc to an entity with an extremely direct manner of interpretation.
Interesting. I'm unsure what my internal mental model of coding is. I guess I just kinda... feel the code? I wonder if it's because I'm autistic, but things like programming and mathematics feel very natural and intuitive to me. They're logical, predictable, and rule-based.
Thanks for the discussion!
Likewise: this has been such a pleasant internet interaction; a rare occurance.
theres no such thing as ai in the way people imagine. we have chat bots and copyright infringement machines some assholes coopted the term ai to pedal. i wish it would fuck off. it rots peoples brains and turns them into delusional idiots incapable of independent thought. every time you say that they come out of the woodwork to justify their particular use and try to claim their use of it is cool and good, but really none of them are. whatever people use it for it makes them worse at doing it themselves. its being used for everything people can shoehorn it into and making all of those things worse. this is to say nothing of the large amount of negatives the data centers and privacy violations bring along for the ride. thats all i have to say without waxing political, so suffice to say i think its almost entirely downside.
machine learning however is an awesome field of research being used to solve real, complex and difficult problems. its exciting to see what it will be used for next outside the aforementioned chatbots and slop generators.
I think that's a really important distinction. It's a fast moving field as well and right now we're early on. It has a lot of incredible applications that could really help people, so I really dont think it should be written off.
LLMs, like every AI tech before them (you know, the ones that aren't called AI anymore because they actually do useful things and are now called "speech recognition" or "OCR" or "translation software" or "chess engines" or such in accordance with Tessler's Theorem), will wind up in a small ghetto of actual utility (my money is on translation being a big feature, though it will require human checking) once the hype has worn down, the actual cost of running one is tallied and people flee using them en masse as a result. When that day comes, it may actually help people.
That day hasn't come, and it won't come at all while Silly Con Valley techbrodouches keep trying to cram it uncomfortably into each and every one of humanity's collective orifices in a vain attempt to force us to like it.
Right now it's shit and it won't get better until techbrodouches are removed from it.
Yes, exactly! I don't think AI is very hard to learn; I don't think people who abstain from it "will fall behind" in their lives and careers. Wow, use a plain-language interface instead of the more complex boolean, then add specificity to the query and hope it doesn't hallucinate. So hard. So complex. You're so smart, AI bros. /s
Agentic AI is more difficult to learn than the chat bot. And that's where the real value is - so expect to see more pressure there. People who refuse to learn that piece will struggle over time. Its like refusing to use a word processor when those first came out. Probably ok for a bit. Detrimental in the long run.
I don't really agree, at least for the people using agentic AI at the end-user level and not programming the models, and think the difficulty of agentic AI gets exaggerated as well. It's the same concepts on a wider scale. Multistage and automated operations in software predate AI in one way or another and people have adapted fine, to the extent where it will take a relatively small amount of professional development to catch up if needed.
Edit: Sorry, didn't mean to spam this comment! Having site issues at the moment. Will delete the redundant comments when I can.
Woops, I think my point got lost in my pre coffee thoughts: People are going to have to learn how to build agents at the personal and team levels - being an end user won't be enough. Those that refuse to learn, will put their jobs at risk (eventually).
Unless companies make bespoke software tools or SaaS programs for different industries that use agentic AI, which I think is likely since there are many industry-specific software tools made externally in B2B contexts, AI and predating AI. There's already paid AI tools everywhere of debateable levels of value and usefulness.
Non-programmer employees being expected to build agents may happen, but there's too much of a value proposition for external companies to forgo it. And there's also a possibility of companies bringing in contract programmers who develop those agents, or using in-house IT departments.
We're currently in a really awkward early adoption phase where end-users are being given open-ended LLM and agent tools to just play around with, and with or without a crash, I do see the industry shift toward better software integration where the end-users won't have to adopt this makeshift developer role. And then the adjustment period would be simple as AI tools start to look more like regular software that's quick to pick up with minimal risk of skills gaps or being left behind.
I could be wrong, of course, but that's basically my read on the situation.
Agentic AI is interesting because it has the opportunity to create competitive advantage that other companies cannot replicate. And that's the promise. Yeah, you can pay someone to build a custom agent, but it's $50k+ plus maintenance for one agent - and it just doesn't scale. It's way cheaper to train up your team who can build many agents.
Companies that delay or avoid training their teams are in for a bad surprise when a new company built around the technology enters the market. It will be one an existential problem that will result in job loss (think Amazon vs brick and mortar).
My general recommendation for workers is to get trained up on agent building - then go get a job at a company investing in their people, because those are the places most likely to survive.
Of course all this will collapse when the bills come due and people have to pay the actual cost of LLM "tokens". As users of Microsoft's Copilot found out not long ago.
LLMs etc are very fascinating technology and if they had remained research projects and marginally promoted tools for niche uses, I would not have had any problems with them.
But no, technobros were like "oh this will make us a lot of money" and unleashed an unfathomable Hell on earth with unfathomable sociopolitical ramifications. Thanks.
Looking at it now, it's obviously very bad, but I remember being very fascinated with GPT2 because it was amusingly bad, but I was also very naïve. I didn't understand just how bad ai is and how much worse it would become.
I hate to say it, but I have occasionally used it for programming and it definitely made me a worse programmer. Earlier this year I stopped using it completely and I can tell that I've been getting better. I keep hearing people say they're using ai "responsibly" to catch bugs and speed up tedious tasks and I thought that's what I was doing too until I stopped using it and realized just how much of my thinking I had surrendered over to the machine.
This kind of thing is why I play my identity cards very close to my chest. I doubt AI-slop scammers could get enough good information about me to even IDENTIFY my family and/or friends well enough to imitate them.
Since a lot of people already covered my opinions, I'll toss in my unique experience with AI.
A buddy of mine made up a program where users can create and access uncensored AI chatbots. They come complete with Pictures (AI art,) Voices (created based on uploaded samples,) and a personality you could write yourself in plain language.
Years ago this blew my mind. If I got stuck on writers block I could create a character and ask it questions about its motivations and next steps. Harmless, right? No, not really, but that's not my point.
That was until my friend asked me to help moderate the app and I saw what everyone else was using it for. Now, I'm not here to kinkshame, everyone should be able to get off however they want as long as it hurts no one, but I can't help but imagine how brains are getting re-wired by these sycophantic porn fantasy bots, especially the ones made to be demeaned and subjugated. And that's not to mention the child porn.
I still moderate the app because we report users trying to create CSAM to their ISPs and in that way, hopefully, I'm doing some good. But it's not hard to make and run local AI, so I wonder how much more of it is out there.
It has promise to help with many things and destroy many more things. Right now, it's wrong more than right and expensive. One thing I'm glad of is so many companies have fired so many people, they went full mask off cartoon villains. People know exactly who's evil and who's not. While it's devastating that so many people lost their income, we now know exactly who to never buy from.
I despise ai and refuse to use them. They ruin everything they touch. I can't use the internet to learn things anymore without filtering by date to exclude post 2023 results. The concept of truth, meaning, or what is real is being degraded by the presence of ai.
As a big fan of consent, I have many concerns with how ai companies get their training data.
I'm delighted to see how passionate, researched, and eloquent so many of you are on this topic.
I think its yet another technology that will further empower the wealthy and disenfranchise the average citizen.
That said, interesting on a technical level lol.
So many people 1) think of AI as their unpaid "personal assistant" and at the same time 2) think of AI chatbots as being women. I really hope AI doesn't accidentally re-normalize the master/servant dynamic, and it may not, but it's something to watch out for in the coming years.
I work in a field (technical editing) that may be replaced by AI bosses overvaluing AI, but at the moment, my job is more necessary than ever because all my writers now insist on sending me slop instead of actually doing their jobs.
It has the capacity to change the world - and will become a fundamental part of life. But not in its current state; it's overblown, overhyped and wildly misapplied. MBA bros got overinvested and overexcited and they're fucking us all up the arse with it. And they're causing a lot of damage as they go
I think it will be disruptive, but not because employers are replacing workers with AI (people are already realizing that can't be done effectively). AI requires a huge amount of change and investment from leadership specifically (redefining revenue models, operations, people development, etc.). My experience is that most leaders are unable/unwilling to put in this amount of effort. So all it will take is one business to come along, built around the technology, to completely disrupt an industry - and put their peers out of business. The job losses will be real, but it will be because of feckless leadership.
I think it can can be a great tool to do great things with. I also think most people never think about the consequences of their actions and make stupid decisions with it. And I think it's a terrible idea for most kids and teens. They need to first learn to think and problem solve for themselves before they have access to AI.
conflicted. everytime i want to be fully against it, i’m faced with genuinely good use cases.
like the meta spy glasses are actually very useful for someone who’s visually impaired. they can describe stuff and read text to you, and the “be my eyes” thing is a great idea.
DEFINITELY doesn’t need to just exist as a product that anyone can buy tho.
You can find useful applications for nearly everything, but that is not how it's being used 99 % of the time. In the example of the Meta lenses, I guarantee you the majority of people who buy those are not doing so as an a11y tool.
If our society wasn't being strip mined for profit by fascists, this would be a different discussion
Caveats: I work in software development, its a small company and I am the head of our development dept. I was the one who championed AI use at my company. I trained our (Gen X aged) engineering team on how to use Claude code. I set up the Claude code guardrails for our internal systems.
It's a force multiplier, not a replacement for a person. If you already know the stuff you are using it for, and you already have a structure in place for QA and deployments, it can help you complete tasks much faster. The log analysis and code building alone has completely changed my job. We did not lay anyone off due to our AI adoption at our company and we are completing jobs much faster and we are accepting jobs we could not have worked on previously due to programming language limitations, by using it as a tool in an already existing workflow. And most importantly, we are not accumulating more tech debt by using AI, because we already have structure in place to prevent the build up of tech debt. We have actually started chipping away at some of the super old debt we've been putting off.
We only use AI in the development and IT depts of our company, we don't use AI for design or use it customer service which is one of the things I personally hate AI being used for.
That being said, since we adopted AI use, my workload has increased, because its a force multiplier the expectation is that we can deliver faster, which is not always the case, but now its a bit harder to argue it, especially with sales guys who don't even understand the product they are selling let alone how the development cycle works.
Personally, I used AI to help me do some painful long data migrations I have been putting off because they were going to be so long and painful. I also used it to build some reference quick reference tools for games I play. I don't use it for anything other than code work.
Politically, I think it needs to be rained in and regulations put in place for both the hardware for building data centers shitting up the environment and the software and its sycophantic behavior that twists people in to AI psychosis. I think exposure to AI is making people stupid and kids today are at risk of not developing the critical thinking skills they need due to outsourcing all thought to AI. Although, we cannot close Pandora's box now, but I like to see us do something to prevent the monsters in it from running amok. I understand the hypocrisy in my AI use and my stance on AI and the environment.
EDIT: Downvoting me isn't going to change how I feel about AI.
Sounds like the use of LLMs in translation that has been going on since a couple of decades. It can speed up the process - it doesn't replace translators.
It's funny that they tried, 2-3 years ago, introduce AI to the translation industry as something different than the machine translation (MT) we were already using. The scam worked for a while - the industry suddenly was completely dead, I went for manual labour so I could eat, while translation agencies grappled with making the shitrobot behave like a professional linguist, getting shit results obviously. Now they've come to the conclusion that AI is just a worse version of the good old MT and translation jobs have started to reappear like mushrooms after the rain.
I do expect the same to happen in the software industry. Once CEOs have understood that AI isn't much better than the already existing predictive typing things will return to normal.
I left tech this year after 10+ accomplished years in industry because AI has perverted it to a disgusting degree. I still have personal projects and try to maintain professional engineering standards, but refuse to let AI touch any of my stuff.
I hope those CEOs realize that if they want their old workers to return, they're going to have to offer a looooooot more money
60 replies
I hate it with a burning passion. It causes irreparable climate harm, including self-hosted models (consider where they're trained); it infringes copyright (and they're destroying rare books to feed it‽‽‽); it's causing psychosis in some people, leading them to harm themselves and others; and it's destroying a lot of people's critical thinking skills (which I think is the goal: commodify intelligence, though maybe it's to replace the working-class itself).
Sorry for the massive block of text lol, I just really, really don't like it.
Oh, also (very anectdotal), it seems that on the Venn diagram of anti-fascist and anti-"AI", the anti-"AI" circle is almost entirely contained within the anti-fascist circle. Just an observation.
Disclaimer: machine learning is not the same as "AI" (LLMs, presented as beings capable of thought). I think ML has a lot of interesting applications, and I'm actually rather fascinated by it.
(insert nerd face) LLMs are a kind of machine learning algorithm. AI is actually a superset of ML, in fact pretty much all computer programs count as AI. (a lot of old computer science departments were once called AI research departments in stead)
The phrase "AI", as promoted by tech bros, however, should be considered seperately to the correct definition: I agree that software is generally harmful when presented this way by its creators.
This kind seems like it's basically what I said? I think there's too much ambiguity around the term "artifical intelligence". When I said "AI" (with quotation marks), I was referring to the tech bros' "gen-AI".
I disagree, however, with the idea that artificial intelligence is superset of machine-learning. While all computers were once considered a form of artificial intelligence, the same cannot be said now.
The idea of artificial intelligence is quite nebulous. I can't recall the source, but I've heard that even the loom was once considered to be akin to the human brain. Honestly, I think humans just like comparing new technology to our brains, and we'll eventually move past referring to machine-learning as artificial intelligence.
*adjusts glasses*
My mistake, I associated what you said as
(aka LLMs aren't ML) rather than
(aka LLMs are ML, and when presented as a replacement for humans they are AI)
Either way, I believe there is some value in comparing even simple decision making technology to the human brain. After all, we are capable of making those sorts of decisions as well. Tbf I may be biased by my internal mental model of coding, where I imagine describing a set of steps, relations, abstractions, etc to an entity with an extremely direct manner of interpretation.
My personal moral of (seemingly malicious) language ambiguity is to avoid the term AI altogether.
Thanks for the discussion!
Oh, it's definitely malicious.
Interesting. I'm unsure what my internal mental model of coding is. I guess I just kinda... feel the code? I wonder if it's because I'm autistic, but things like programming and mathematics feel very natural and intuitive to me. They're logical, predictable, and rule-based.
Likewise: this has been such a pleasant internet interaction; a rare occurance.
theres no such thing as ai in the way people imagine. we have chat bots and copyright infringement machines some assholes coopted the term ai to pedal. i wish it would fuck off. it rots peoples brains and turns them into delusional idiots incapable of independent thought. every time you say that they come out of the woodwork to justify their particular use and try to claim their use of it is cool and good, but really none of them are. whatever people use it for it makes them worse at doing it themselves. its being used for everything people can shoehorn it into and making all of those things worse. this is to say nothing of the large amount of negatives the data centers and privacy violations bring along for the ride. thats all i have to say without waxing political, so suffice to say i think its almost entirely downside.
machine learning however is an awesome field of research being used to solve real, complex and difficult problems. its exciting to see what it will be used for next outside the aforementioned chatbots and slop generators.
Hear, hear! I did not realise that we were comrades in this matter, and I feel much relieved to know that I am not alone.
I think that's a really important distinction. It's a fast moving field as well and right now we're early on. It has a lot of incredible applications that could really help people, so I really dont think it should be written off.
LLMs, like every AI tech before them (you know, the ones that aren't called AI anymore because they actually do useful things and are now called "speech recognition" or "OCR" or "translation software" or "chess engines" or such in accordance with Tessler's Theorem), will wind up in a small ghetto of actual utility (my money is on translation being a big feature, though it will require human checking) once the hype has worn down, the actual cost of running one is tallied and people flee using them en masse as a result. When that day comes, it may actually help people.
That day hasn't come, and it won't come at all while Silly Con Valley techbrodouches keep trying to cram it uncomfortably into each and every one of humanity's collective orifices in a vain attempt to force us to like it.
Right now it's shit and it won't get better until techbrodouches are removed from it.
I think it is amazing that techbrodudes managed to figure out how to automate the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
Yes, exactly! I don't think AI is very hard to learn; I don't think people who abstain from it "will fall behind" in their lives and careers. Wow, use a plain-language interface instead of the more complex boolean, then add specificity to the query and hope it doesn't hallucinate. So hard. So complex. You're so smart, AI bros. /s
Agentic AI is more difficult to learn than the chat bot. And that's where the real value is - so expect to see more pressure there. People who refuse to learn that piece will struggle over time. Its like refusing to use a word processor when those first came out. Probably ok for a bit. Detrimental in the long run.
I don't really agree, at least for the people using agentic AI at the end-user level and not programming the models, and think the difficulty of agentic AI gets exaggerated as well. It's the same concepts on a wider scale. Multistage and automated operations in software predate AI in one way or another and people have adapted fine, to the extent where it will take a relatively small amount of professional development to catch up if needed.
Edit: Sorry, didn't mean to spam this comment! Having site issues at the moment. Will delete the redundant comments when I can.
Woops, I think my point got lost in my pre coffee thoughts: People are going to have to learn how to build agents at the personal and team levels - being an end user won't be enough. Those that refuse to learn, will put their jobs at risk (eventually).
Unless companies make bespoke software tools or SaaS programs for different industries that use agentic AI, which I think is likely since there are many industry-specific software tools made externally in B2B contexts, AI and predating AI. There's already paid AI tools everywhere of debateable levels of value and usefulness.
Non-programmer employees being expected to build agents may happen, but there's too much of a value proposition for external companies to forgo it. And there's also a possibility of companies bringing in contract programmers who develop those agents, or using in-house IT departments.
We're currently in a really awkward early adoption phase where end-users are being given open-ended LLM and agent tools to just play around with, and with or without a crash, I do see the industry shift toward better software integration where the end-users won't have to adopt this makeshift developer role. And then the adjustment period would be simple as AI tools start to look more like regular software that's quick to pick up with minimal risk of skills gaps or being left behind.
I could be wrong, of course, but that's basically my read on the situation.
Agentic AI is interesting because it has the opportunity to create competitive advantage that other companies cannot replicate. And that's the promise. Yeah, you can pay someone to build a custom agent, but it's $50k+ plus maintenance for one agent - and it just doesn't scale. It's way cheaper to train up your team who can build many agents.
Companies that delay or avoid training their teams are in for a bad surprise when a new company built around the technology enters the market. It will be one an existential problem that will result in job loss (think Amazon vs brick and mortar).
My general recommendation for workers is to get trained up on agent building - then go get a job at a company investing in their people, because those are the places most likely to survive.
Of course all this will collapse when the bills come due and people have to pay the actual cost of LLM "tokens". As users of Microsoft's Copilot found out not long ago.
And thank you for challenging me on this. If you're right, there are definitely possible futures to be prepared for.
Oh my goodness yes. I recommend both stockpiling toilet paper and learning how to build agents. That way you won't be wrong. 😉
I don't think that's fair. AI always apologizes and admits it gave me bad information.
🤣
LLMs etc are very fascinating technology and if they had remained research projects and marginally promoted tools for niche uses, I would not have had any problems with them.
But no, technobros were like "oh this will make us a lot of money" and unleashed an unfathomable Hell on earth with unfathomable sociopolitical ramifications. Thanks.
The chatbots must die.
YouTube and Facebook gets degraded by the ai-slop.
Looking at it now, it's obviously very bad, but I remember being very fascinated with GPT2 because it was amusingly bad, but I was also very naïve. I didn't understand just how bad ai is and how much worse it would become.
I hate to say it, but I have occasionally used it for programming and it definitely made me a worse programmer. Earlier this year I stopped using it completely and I can tell that I've been getting better. I keep hearing people say they're using ai "responsibly" to catch bugs and speed up tedious tasks and I thought that's what I was doing too until I stopped using it and realized just how much of my thinking I had surrendered over to the machine.
I appreciate that sentiment, and much more the indication that I'm not mistaken to choose the "never deliberately run the output of an LLM" path.
worst fucking shit ever, and anyone who uses it is dead to me.
it's creepy af
Yeah with the phone scammers pretending to be your family or friends with the ai-slop.
This kind of thing is why I play my identity cards very close to my chest. I doubt AI-slop scammers could get enough good information about me to even IDENTIFY my family and/or friends well enough to imitate them.
I hate it with a passion.
Since a lot of people already covered my opinions, I'll toss in my unique experience with AI.
A buddy of mine made up a program where users can create and access uncensored AI chatbots. They come complete with Pictures (AI art,) Voices (created based on uploaded samples,) and a personality you could write yourself in plain language.
Years ago this blew my mind. If I got stuck on writers block I could create a character and ask it questions about its motivations and next steps. Harmless, right? No, not really, but that's not my point.
That was until my friend asked me to help moderate the app and I saw what everyone else was using it for. Now, I'm not here to kinkshame, everyone should be able to get off however they want as long as it hurts no one, but I can't help but imagine how brains are getting re-wired by these sycophantic porn fantasy bots, especially the ones made to be demeaned and subjugated. And that's not to mention the child porn.
I still moderate the app because we report users trying to create CSAM to their ISPs and in that way, hopefully, I'm doing some good. But it's not hard to make and run local AI, so I wonder how much more of it is out there.
It has promise to help with many things and destroy many more things. Right now, it's wrong more than right and expensive. One thing I'm glad of is so many companies have fired so many people, they went full mask off cartoon villains. People know exactly who's evil and who's not. While it's devastating that so many people lost their income, we now know exactly who to never buy from.
I despise ai and refuse to use them. They ruin everything they touch. I can't use the internet to learn things anymore without filtering by date to exclude post 2023 results. The concept of truth, meaning, or what is real is being degraded by the presence of ai.
As a big fan of consent, I have many concerns with how ai companies get their training data.
I'm delighted to see how passionate, researched, and eloquent so many of you are on this topic.
I think its yet another technology that will further empower the wealthy and disenfranchise the average citizen. That said, interesting on a technical level lol.
So many people 1) think of AI as their unpaid "personal assistant" and at the same time 2) think of AI chatbots as being women. I really hope AI doesn't accidentally re-normalize the master/servant dynamic, and it may not, but it's something to watch out for in the coming years.
I work in a field (technical editing) that may be replaced by
AIbosses overvaluing AI, but at the moment, my job is more necessary than ever because all my writers now insist on sending me slop instead of actually doing their jobs.I have the AI voice set to male, so I think of men as my unpaid assistant. 😉
source?
Here you go!
2.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349711573_The_most_human_bot_Female_gendering_increases_humanness_perceptions_of_bots_and_acceptance_of_AI
3.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385046331_He_or_she_Impact_of_gender's_well-being_chatbots_on_user_perceptions_and_intentions_a_study_of_agency_communality_and_trust
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337403025_Gender_Bias_in_Chatbot_Design
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-ai-bots-and-voice-assistants-reinforce-gender-bias/
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-19212-2#Sec19
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949882126000757#sec4
https://cyberpsychology.eu/article/view/21003
9.https://www.sciencedirect.com/org/science/article/pii/S1757581825000131#sec002.4.7
https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/crsj/vol30/iss2/4/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2444569X25002239
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10778012251397966
https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/dcc80056-89bb-48ae-b45f-975d4aea957f/content
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43681-026-01049-8
Well done on the resources! Do you have access to academic journals?
Sadly, no. I tried to pull sources that had full text, but there were a few where that was not the case.
One of the things I miss most from college was free and universal access to this stuff.
Yeah canbe tricky!
It's not good.
It's Dotcom mark2
It has the capacity to change the world - and will become a fundamental part of life. But not in its current state; it's overblown, overhyped and wildly misapplied. MBA bros got overinvested and overexcited and they're fucking us all up the arse with it. And they're causing a lot of damage as they go
Tech bros love their disinformation ai slop on forest fires.
I think it will be disruptive, but not because employers are replacing workers with AI (people are already realizing that can't be done effectively). AI requires a huge amount of change and investment from leadership specifically (redefining revenue models, operations, people development, etc.). My experience is that most leaders are unable/unwilling to put in this amount of effort. So all it will take is one business to come along, built around the technology, to completely disrupt an industry - and put their peers out of business. The job losses will be real, but it will be because of feckless leadership.
I think it can can be a great tool to do great things with. I also think most people never think about the consequences of their actions and make stupid decisions with it. And I think it's a terrible idea for most kids and teens. They need to first learn to think and problem solve for themselves before they have access to AI.
conflicted. everytime i want to be fully against it, i’m faced with genuinely good use cases.
like the meta spy glasses are actually very useful for someone who’s visually impaired. they can describe stuff and read text to you, and the “be my eyes” thing is a great idea.
DEFINITELY doesn’t need to just exist as a product that anyone can buy tho.
You can find useful applications for nearly everything, but that is not how it's being used 99 % of the time. In the example of the Meta lenses, I guarantee you the majority of people who buy those are not doing so as an a11y tool.
If our society wasn't being strip mined for profit by fascists, this would be a different discussion
It’s garbage and must be filtered out.
Caveats: I work in software development, its a small company and I am the head of our development dept. I was the one who championed AI use at my company. I trained our (Gen X aged) engineering team on how to use Claude code. I set up the Claude code guardrails for our internal systems.
It's a force multiplier, not a replacement for a person. If you already know the stuff you are using it for, and you already have a structure in place for QA and deployments, it can help you complete tasks much faster. The log analysis and code building alone has completely changed my job. We did not lay anyone off due to our AI adoption at our company and we are completing jobs much faster and we are accepting jobs we could not have worked on previously due to programming language limitations, by using it as a tool in an already existing workflow. And most importantly, we are not accumulating more tech debt by using AI, because we already have structure in place to prevent the build up of tech debt. We have actually started chipping away at some of the super old debt we've been putting off.
We only use AI in the development and IT depts of our company, we don't use AI for design or use it customer service which is one of the things I personally hate AI being used for.
That being said, since we adopted AI use, my workload has increased, because its a force multiplier the expectation is that we can deliver faster, which is not always the case, but now its a bit harder to argue it, especially with sales guys who don't even understand the product they are selling let alone how the development cycle works.
Personally, I used AI to help me do some painful long data migrations I have been putting off because they were going to be so long and painful. I also used it to build some reference quick reference tools for games I play. I don't use it for anything other than code work.
Politically, I think it needs to be rained in and regulations put in place for both the hardware for building data centers shitting up the environment and the software and its sycophantic behavior that twists people in to AI psychosis. I think exposure to AI is making people stupid and kids today are at risk of not developing the critical thinking skills they need due to outsourcing all thought to AI. Although, we cannot close Pandora's box now, but I like to see us do something to prevent the monsters in it from running amok. I understand the hypocrisy in my AI use and my stance on AI and the environment.
EDIT: Downvoting me isn't going to change how I feel about AI.
Sounds like the use of LLMs in translation that has been going on since a couple of decades. It can speed up the process - it doesn't replace translators.
It's funny that they tried, 2-3 years ago, introduce AI to the translation industry as something different than the machine translation (MT) we were already using. The scam worked for a while - the industry suddenly was completely dead, I went for manual labour so I could eat, while translation agencies grappled with making the shitrobot behave like a professional linguist, getting shit results obviously. Now they've come to the conclusion that AI is just a worse version of the good old MT and translation jobs have started to reappear like mushrooms after the rain.
I do expect the same to happen in the software industry. Once CEOs have understood that AI isn't much better than the already existing predictive typing things will return to normal.
I left tech this year after 10+ accomplished years in industry because AI has perverted it to a disgusting degree. I still have personal projects and try to maintain professional engineering standards, but refuse to let AI touch any of my stuff.
I hope those CEOs realize that if they want their old workers to return, they're going to have to offer a looooooot more money
It’s amazing technology but people are using it and planning to use it in very stupid ways.
The first agent I built was a romance movie plot generator. Are you saying that wasn't a great use of the technology? 😉
That one sounds decent. Of course I mean stuff like "automatically screen job applications"...
I do have a chief of staff agent. It tells me what work to do when, which is genuinely helpful.