Post

I don’t think there’s a single serious critic who says AI’s not useful? The concerns I see are about content rights, worker impacts, environmental effects, epistemological threats, or media manipulation. But that’s all predicated on the idea that it *does* work, often too well for people to manage…

Kevin Roose@kevinroose.com

The NYT Magazine asked me and @caseynewton.bsky.social to open their AI issue by talking about how we use AI, why it's not going away, and how you can't be a serious critic if you're in denial about how useful it is. Bluesky's gonna love this one! www.nytimes.com/2025/06/16/m...

To be fair, there have been many prominent people who have told me directly and repeatedly that AI is useless and they think I'm crazy/stupid for believing otherwise.

There seems to be a shift to anti-AI fundamentalism and a part of it is exaggerating its technical deficiencies. The meaning of "slop" drifted from "polished mediocrity" to as Merriam Webster has it: crude and low-quality.

0 reposts2 likes

Wasn’t “generated at scale” always part of the concept though? To me the more striking drift is from “bulk content meant to fool only robots or the elderly” to now including one-off works by humans who took pains to pass the work off as purely handmade.

It comes down to "in the worst hands." And the bad uses: scaled-up plagiarism, subversion of labor, resource waste, etc, force out potential good ones as everyone gets angrier at them and it