My previous work enforced the use of AI for everything besides wipping your own butt. I was a senior dev and adamantly refused to use it for ethical reasons.
Not once have I touched it, not once I felt I needed it. I said as much whenever I had meetings with eng. managers and I could provably argue that I was doing very fine without it, I was in fact as much or more productive than my AI addled colleagues and furthermore I found many severe bugs in their PRs. I saw the code quality and stability of my project take a deep plunge because of Claude. They said it was company policy to use… but because it was not on my contract and I was not falling behind on any of my responsibilities I answered I would rather be fired than to use AI. I never was. I kept at this for a year, and finally changed to somewhere where my judgement on when and where to use these things is more important than KPIs.
It’s not that I didn’t see a use case for AI - I saw very minor use cases for dashboards and quick insight into logs - but as much as I can I don’t allow managers and KPIs to have this much control over how I work and which tools I use.
Its me! I am young again!
Nice. What do you think about AI?
As an old person I can also say that old people don’t trust AI, or the leaders of those companies, or the current administration…
No, that can’t be. The internet has told me that old people are stupid and love Trump and fascism and it’s totally acceptable to mock and hate people based on their age even though they have no control of their age.
The internet assures me it’s a bastion of welcoming care for all, so the hate against old people must be universally deserved. It’s not like the good people of the internet would just latch on to whatever trends they think will be supported and make them look like good people while allowing them to vomit hate at anyone they in their infinite wisdom determine to be bad people.
In reviewing your message, it seems like you’ve been faced with some difficulties because of AI. But as young people, I believe AI is the future of humans. We should develop and improve AI in various types of parts, even though the current result is not as good as we expected initially.
Old people were the biggest voter block FOR the current (US) administration. You might not like it, but “old people” certainly have some other opinions.
I’m not monolithic.
Sorry, I’ve only got this really broad brush. Actually it’s more like a firecracker in a paint tin.
Sure. All people have their own opinions. Grouping people by a specific trait doesn’t give you a monolith that shares the same opinions on everything. There are Blacks, Latinos, Gays, and Trans for Trump.
The comment was refuting the insinuation in the headline that only young people feel this way because older people are stupid and awful. Somehow while trying to appear to be welcoming and not discriminate against minorities, the internet has become full of ageist discrimination. Age is another trait people can’t control or change. Discriminating or mocking people based on that is as wrong as doing the same based on skin color or sexuality.
Older people aren’t stupid and awful, they are just generally more set in their ways, and factually ARE more vulnerable to misinformation and lies, which is why they’re the most vulnerable to scams.
The previous generation, at least in America, was far more repressed and had far less access to information than we do today, which results in more narrow-minded beliefs. Not all old people are like this, but the comment you’re talking about said “old people don’t trust ai” which is not true. Old people as a group do, this person as an individual in that group does not.
Old people as a group don’t exist. There is no monolith based on simple traits like age, or race, or gender. While more members of one specific group sharing any of these traits can be likely to trust or mistrust or agree with anything, boiling them down to a singular opinion or mental state is always wrong. It’s discriminatory.
You saying old people as a group do trust AI is as fucked up as saying that black people as a group do love watermelon.
I’m a retired programmer and I always regretted not getting into AI (like, developing it rather than making use of it) because I think I could have made significant contributions. Now I’m glad I never did because I’ll never have to deal with the guilt of having made Terminator a reality.
I’ll just have to deal with Terminator is all. :(
It’s almost like it doesn’t matter what plebs think and we’ve known this for a long time.
All my members hate fucking AI and majority of them are over 60. Hell one had me take his payment because he flat out wasn’t going let a clanker take it. Dont trust the automated system rather talk to a human.
My dad died last fall and when I called the funeral home to arrange for his body to be picked up, their answering service was fucking AI. However angry you think that might make you feel, it’s worse than that.
That’s fucked up.
I don’t know man, I’m a fairly old person and I’m constantly surrounded by people who seem unable to think without it.
I’m so blackpilled on the average person. These stats mean nothing because the average person not trusting a tech company does absolutely nothing to push them away from it. 80% distrust AI but 50% use it and the stat is growing.
Indeed. The average person seems to need instagram, whatsapp and xitter to fill their meaningless little isolated lives with distractions to feel… something. However on a more positive note, once people get suspicious about AI slop they tend to notice the slop patterns more easily, which is a good development. It’s something that can’t be unseen.
Counterpoint: once they notice some patterns it makes the more gullible for the ones they don’t notice, because “now they can detect AI”.
Possible, but they would more likely see more false positives depending on how suspicious they are… like when people suspected images to be photoshopped in the past.
I don’t just think AI should be regulated, I think everyone at the hyperscaler companies should be criminally indicted. Every employee at OpenAI and Anthropic working on AI development should be indicted on 8 million counts of child endangerment.
The relevant statute is California 273a.
It is a crime in the state of California to allow a child to be placed in a position where great harm could come to them. For example, people have been indicted under this statute because they had drugs in the same house as young children. Even if no children are actually hurt, simply putting them in a situation where harm is likely is the crime.
It would normally be quite difficult to prove that the actions of OpenAI and others are endangering children. But the very words of these companies would be the first exhibit of the prosecution. They’ve openly confessed to their crimes! These very same companies and their leaders have repeatedly said that they’re building machines that they themselves believe have a reasonable chance of destroying humanity. And the children of California are a subset of humanity.
Whether their claims are realistic or not, I cannot say. But I simply believe that it is legal to build a machine that you yourself believe could destroy the world. We’re so glazed over by the novelty of AI that we forget to treat it like any other threat. In most places it is a crime to perform some action that you believe has a realistic chance of hurting people, even if you have no intention or desire to hurt people.
Well, according to OpenAI, the machines they are building represent a very real risk to the life and safety of every child in the State of California. I see no reason that they shouldn’t be charged with millions of counts of child endangerment. According to their own words, they are literally putting the lives of children at risk. That is a crime. That is not legal. And we should stop pretending it is.
If this argument worked fossil fuel companies wouldn’t exist
There’s a big difference between, “I know my product will statistically increase the chance of early death across the population” and “I believe there is a very real chance my product will kill everyone.”
All sorts of things increase risk. But child endangerment and similar laws are meant for very immediate and direct threats. OpenAI is building machines that they themselves believe could kill everyone. I see that as very similar to the idea of having fentanyl in the same house as young children. The fentanyl isn’t a danger because it will increase the chance of the kids getting lung cancer in their sixties. The fentanyl is a danger because one dose of it could kill a kid instantly. The law addresses immediate threats, not statistical increases in mortality observable across the population.
If people didn’t consume oil, fossil fuel companies wouldn’t exist either.
anyone can inform the authorities, and should they continue to ignore then that is clear next goal of the campaign -> removal of corrupt officials that dont care about the law.
Maybe the kids are gonna be alright, after all.
AI is just one of several serious existential threats the kids will have to deal with. They’re far from alright.
“The kids are alright” does not mean that the world where the kids live is alright, it means that the kids are alright. 😅
We got THIS close to being done with nicotine and bullshit in the air in daily life, and then the kids discovered vaping.
At best, the kids are in the aggregate no better or worse than the generations before them. No generation is going to save us from stupid when stupid is part of our species’ DNA.
To me it means: the kids are healthy and secure, and coping with the world with a reasonable prospect of a good future. But I agree that it’s a good thing that they aren’t entirely duped by the abusers of AI, if that’s what you mean.
The Epstein class is their biggest threat by far. AI and what they do on private islands are just two of many reasons to get rid of billionaires.
I agree. I really don’t understand why society tolerates, let alone promotes and idolizes, billionaires, while median net worth remains below $200,000, and probably much lower in most of the rest of the world. I don’t think everyone should be forced to be exactly equal but the current disparity between median and Elon is more than 6 orders of magnitude, depending on the day of the week, and even to your average barely a billionaire it is more than 3 orders of magnitude. It’s excessive, and looking at how society is going, fairly clearly unhealthy for everyone involved.
Anecdotally, all our young family members don’t trust A.I. at all.
Once, I asked it a question as a joke, (I think it was about "Labubu"s or something I’m out of touch about); they told me it sounds like fake news 😂. I asked the tool if we could trust it, and it said something like “no, don’t trust me”, which was hilarious.
I think kids these days have a good bullshit detector, by necessity.
If that is true then it only just developed in the last 2 years. There was a huge shift to the right in youth voters, largely because TikTok promoted Trump.
Yesterday I heard an 11yr old - who I’ve witnessed watching AI brain rot content recently - decry that some channel he was shown was “AI slop”, and was incredulous about being shown it. Now I know kids can change their mind very quickly and will just parrot what they hear and think is cool, but it felt good to hear a young kid say this to another, and essentially be mad about it.
true but kids should also trust AI to be AI
then it becomes a useful tool
never useful, always negative value
But older people still trust surveys. So no, we’re doomed.
Nah, why would anyone love AI when we can just–
Let’s all love Lain!
Present day, present time… Hahaha
And these AI companies don’t seem to understand…
… ((They were never honest, can’t make a lyric)
And all those fears they hold so dear
Will turn to reality in their stocks
And you know what GPT says might hurt you
And you know data centers destroy so much
And generated art… don’t even feel a thing
I’m part of a small team working on a research project involving regional online behavior and information patterns. We’re trying to understand how people in different parts of North America and Europe interact with certain types of online content.
We’re looking for a few community members who’d be open to helping us test and review some simple online tasks and share feedback from their local perspective. Nothing complicated — just small interactions and observations that help us refine our models.
If you’re interested in contributing or want to know more about the project, feel free to reach out. Happy to explain what we’re working on.
to help you develop your AI that will then take our jobs? nah thank you
Nice, The speed of AI development is faster than in any other parts today. So we should find and mine a new market to leverage this AI, not be the employee of AI.
Why would the AI take your jobs, I though AI is worthless, can’t do anything right and everybody hates it…
Both can be true. People are being fired in absurd numbers and AI is not doing a good job of replacing them, but management refuses to accept it. Cory Doctorow has written extensively about this.
I could imagine they increasingly don’t trust politicians either.
It’s almost as if there is a pattern there isn’t it?
Maybe we are being filled with more bullshit all around than we have ever been!The same poll showed:
According to the CNBC Generation Lab poll, which received responses from 1,088 people earlier this month, 46% of Americans between the ages of 18 and 34 now hold either a “favorable” or a “very favorable” view of democratic socialism. An additional 23% held “somewhat unfavorable” or “very unfavorable” opinions, according to the poll, which had a margin of error of 2.97 percentage points.
and
Almost half of respondents, 45%, said they believe AI will have a negative impact on their careers, while 10% believe it will help them with their careers. An additional 40% said they believe “the federal government” must set rules for AI, while 36% said they believe “an independent expert body” should set the rules of the game. Just 8% said they think AI “shouldn’t be regulated.” A majority, 60%, believe data center construction “must be slowed,” while 15% favor “speeding it up.”
While they may or may not distrust current politicians, it does not appear that they’re significantly distrustful of politicians in general.
very favorable” view of democratic socialism.
Maybe there is hope for USA at some point in the future.
Well, not even a majority of 18 to 34s (smallest voting block) have a favorable view of something that has shown to work for in 36 of 37 “developed economies”. I don’t know how optimistic that is…
Maybe that’s precisely the goal… increase distrust in Politicians so that people start voting for the extreme right who then get rid of the last resemblance of democracy.
Sadly yes.
Politicians doing nothing for the people since a good 50 years may have something to do with the rise of the extreme right too.
there you go! keep using that noggin!
If AI gave correct answers 95% of the time instead of <50%, didn’t cause massive inflation in computer parts and doesn’t completely fuck the environment I’d be somewhat in favor of it.
“If my grandmother had wheels she would’ve been a bike”
Yep, the reality is different so to hell with AI.
5% is still very very high, especially talking about the things people want to use it for
It would still be dogshit for how slop has infused the human creative domain, and for how it contributes to brain rot. In fact, being more correct would probably make both of those things worse.
