Post

Totally agree...there's a difference between trying to find new ways of identifying early indicators of cancer, and "creating" "art", that means, like many things, there's nuance 280 characters isn't the best way of doing that, and it's not just AI I'd put in this category on here

Tech CEO’s behave badly, then are shocked that no one wants what they are selling.

because most people here on the anti side understand the difference between ai tools as used in scientific fields, and the genAi bullshit you find everywhere else. i feel like one or the other needs a serious rebranding. tho given that the conflating is coming from the genAi side, it won't be them.

I tried. :) bsky.app/profile/kyle...

Who fucking cares?

I understood the comment. I said the process of software development has been utterly transformed. That's a profound functional change. This is a tool, and its utility is determined by the users of the tool.

honestly it seemed like it was getting a lot better for a while, but then it started getting worse again

I think I’m coming around to the idea that AI is a very big assistant and time saver in my job and I’m not sure how my job survives into the future. Soon, AI will have realized Shakespeare’s dream. “The first thing we do, . . .”

This is true, but the same problem applies to (for example) Claude alone

There's a big difference between one-shotting something with AI and spending hours/days/weeks refining it with AI, but that's a nuance that's lost on most. The work matters.

you ai losers keep whining about not having interesting discussions here but you morons never have anything interesting to say. youve never done anything but bootlick for some of vilest people around while pretending its good youre melting your brain and forcing everyone else to deal with your slop

James Balls

Because every time the rich people shilling AI keep opening their mouth, they say how much we can acquire (as in buy) knowledge from them (S. Altman), also when confronted with actual evidence of how harmful it is, they just plug their ears and call you liar and ignorant (J. Hwang)

Well if we DON'T keep pounding on how bad AI is, people will keep trying to tell us it ISN'T, and we'll NEVER run 'em outta here.

its possible, but you might have to subscribe to a big moderation list

Wouldn’t be surprised if this year’s revelations - wrap calls to models in self-directed loops, in essence - haven’t caused a lot of people to sit back and reflect quietly. For me myself, I’m still quite discombobulated by better tooling being what unlocked things to this extent.

Put this post into AI so I can understand what you were talking about...

I'd go further; it's now spread to technology discussion in general. This is partly because the majority of the big tech news sites have been shit-awful clickbait for a decade now. What's partic worrying is that Ars comments (the Not Shit-Awful Tech Site (tm) ) are just like you describe too.

2 points. It is going to cradh massively at some point, realise it is here to stay but some of the stuff happening with lending between companies is ponzi like. 2 - the massive water in take whilst crops boil in the ground and planning permission for farmers to build resevoirs drags is a problem.

I have never used an AI tool and thought, "Man doesn't suck at all compared to the old version." Everyone else is arriving at that point.

@antiantiai.bsky.social helps

grok sum up this bullshit for me i am already bored of it

- humanoid robot kicking man in the groin; humanoid robot kicking child in the belly - getting stuck while trying to install Claude Code CLI locally on a Windows PC It seems understandable that the general perception of 'AI' is negatively distorted by these and similar events.

June, up from $5.7 billion in the first quarter. " It also mentioned worsening losses without giving figures. It later amended the piece with "[OpenAI] operating loss, which includes stock-based compensation, widened from $9.3 billion in the first quarter to $12.3 billion in the second quarter,

The Transformer, and the concept of Self-Attention more broadly, is one of the coolest marriage of mathematics and computational science ever.

If we can all tell you suck just from one post, then it’s probably you

The information it produces is unreliable, over-reliant on natural resources and diverts web traffic from human sources of information. Is that enough? Can I just call it “bad” now?

Never been a fan of "the only truth; the one path."

This is so true, and frustrating. I’d love to have those conversations here; there are some real questions that need to be thought out in the grey areas, but you really do get shouted down quickly. It’s a shame.

Whining. You're whining.

It’s complex and soundbites are easier? Personally I think the more interesting discussions are regulation and how to reduce environmental impact. AI is here to stay and, despite the dangers, I rather feel a nation that eschews AI will be conquered by one that has it

Mission Accomplished

But AI more broadly...of course very big difference between Deep Blue and Claude conceptually and practically.

A technology pushed by oligarchs whose primary purpose is to eliminate millions of jobs, has a hard job convincing the uncommitted that it's a good thing. That's even not taking into account the huge environmental impact.

Maybe we can reframe the conversation, facilitating healthy debate and instigating refreshed thought leadership. There are, after all, plenty of people interested; this, despite the despair and rot within so many talks on the matter, today. semperliberalis.com/2026/08/dont...

grifters and sockpuppets

Happy to agree on that front!

The industry has unjustifiably decided to drop these blobs in mostly low income areas that are already impacted by electric/water costs while not sharing in those costs. Not to mention, those resources are already strained due to drought. They’ve already lost the PR war by the above stunts.

And it would probably be helpful if you didn't insist things are true that are observably false...

Notwithstanding the huge amount of money behind AI-hype, public concern about unregulated AI development & deployment is skyrocketing—most visibly in connection with data centers. That’s extraordinary. I agree with you that discussions of utility are largely misplaced, but that’s mostly a footnote…

You can’t expect public policy to be developed via social media, but social media certainly changes the Overton window. I don’t think for a second that we would be having debates in the political arena about the future of AI but for the crescendo of public opposition. It creates opportunities.

Its not tech nihilism. I use all sort of modern tech. I dont use any genai. Cause it ain't tech.

I use LLMs all day every day at work, and frequently at home, and post about my experiences doing so and nobody has been mean to me yet.

This is the absolute opposite of the truth. There are massive amounts of AI psoitive people here, I even think they are in majority. That you do not realize this shows that you are so deep in the AI evangelism bubble that *any* critisism is unacceptable

Imho AI is a victim of its sponsors & CEO Silicon Valley founder vocabulary/mindset. They have flat out said it’s an existential threat to the species; so of course the counter sentiment is “absolutely not & no way will we countenance it as discussed.” So not entirely surprised

Go back to Twitter blue checkmark

And yet I see nothing but nuanced and moderate responses here. So maybe it’s not quite as bad…

"You can't just think AI is bad, or overhyped, you've also got to subscribe to a very particular worst-case scenario about *how* it's bad and how bad it is." Isn't this just called "explaining your viewpoint"?

I don't think that's true? It's gotten easier and the most over-the-top angry people have chilled out or shut up a bit about it, in my experience

Do you think this may have anything to do with the increase in data centers, inflating power costs, or the fact that several people invested in AI don't like democracy? The culture has shifted, you just don't like the direction it went in.

James Balls

if you can't have a discussion with people who disagree with you that's a you problem it doesn't prove that there's some vast hive mind that's demanding your compliance here

I got added to an AI haters blocklist recently. If you subscribed to a few like that, you could make a nice little bubble for yourself.

Perhaps it’s because the benefits are to almost everyone marginal, yet the costs existential?

I'm in the middle of an incredibly boring twelve stage code audit which results in minor housekeeping changes, using ChatGPT and Codex. This means ChatGPT and I spend time waiting for Codex to complete his task like the overly eager puppy that he is! Codex recently suggested we rebuild something..

Cause it is that bad

Do you really expect nuanced discussion about a technology that is putting people out of work, stealing their creativity, destroying their environment, sucking up their water and their electricity, and driving up the price of most electronic components, whilst also being shoved down our throats?

what is becoming the next culture/class war imported from the US on Data Centres etc. means there is so much to dig into it turns into a mess

Maybe the misunderstanding over being articulate or not is that Luddites were executed rather than heard out

I guess it's quicker than just going to Reddit directly?

you have not yet begun to comprehend the possibilities of worst-case scenarios

There are a lot more similarities than differences between those two sorts of AI.

Are you new to social media?

Cry about it

I'm not disputing whether that stance exists, but I don't think it's fair to lump all critics in with it?

No, you're not understanding correctly.

Yes because pretending like the worst case scenario won’t or couldn’t happen has worked out for us so well so far. Maybe if AI evangelists actually addressed the worst case scenario in a way that didn’t boil down to “don’t worry about it” then more people could get over it.

Heroin is useful painkiller. Psilocybin shows promise for treating a range of mental health issues. Perhaps every profession should use them just so we can find the best use cases! Food and drug companies should put them in everything, we could make sure to have them in schools! -SATIRE & SARCASM

There’s a lot of people who haven’t revised their view from gpt2 when it was a cool tech demo. The latest models are shockingly useful. I’ve completed very complicated personal projects that would have been impossible to fit in alongside work commitments using them.

That’s not a real analysis. There’s other growth econ side has impact on employment, wages, productivity, and demand (+ composition of those). environment side has water use, pollution, energy demand, how that energy is sourced, how the externalities above are dealt with (and who pays)

Yeah sorry but that's wrong. The environmental damage is real and locked in. The reason for that is that we cannot serve this level of growth at this speed through renewables, so everyone is going for OCGTs which really are not very efficient, and highly locally polluting. 1/3

Look here a real life example of choose your own facts world Yes, agriculture has its multiple environmental issues that should be worked on. It also does a little thing called sustaining human life by feeding us

You're lying.

They were right, these things were all true. Weren't going to stop the looms though, and are all from one side of the ledger.

That particular view has been supported by multiple studies involving all of those aspects. We keep having to relitigate them because you AI ding-dongs literally ignore all that because you're literally addicted to the (unfounded! Incorrect! Wrong!) feeling of productivity you get from them.

What discussion do you want to have about AI?

There is no shortage of people talking about the environmental impact on here! It should be possible to talk about other things too, without four throat clearing posts ahead of it each time. But it very much isn't.

It's more that if you're where I am, which is that this is an impressive technology with transformative potential, surrounded by hype merchants, and at the centre of a damaging financial bubble, it's hard to have constructive conversations

Driving off “AI” fans is good, actually.

The spittle-flecked frothing-at-the-mouth cohort has definitely brought about a tremendous amount of self-censorship...

Same experience here. I don't want to talk that much about #LLM s here because of the knee-jerk reactions, even from people whose opinions I value and would like to follow in other topics (which is why I haven't started blocking and muting them). bsky.app/profile/jmko...

It's a shame!

Sounds like you lost in the marketplace of ideas! Sucks to suck!

Hey man do you think we are also not bored and frustrated by having to constantly repeat ourselves all the time? Do you think that anyone who is harmed by this stuff actually wants to spend tons of their own time trying to convince people in your position? Because I assure you: it actually sucks!

People need to make a habit of openly disagreeing with people who share their conclusions but have arrived at them for the wrong reasons. I'd call myself an AI sceptic (I think it's not as good or useful as people believe) but also despair a lot of the misinformed critique.

There are so many angles to AI. There is the ability to speed up research (both socially useful and harmful outcomes). There is its impact on the society, economy and environment. All interesting and valid discussions. Sadly what you get here is often AI is evil and supporters are bad people!

Name one.

It IS pretty much useless for the everyday person. AI is only good for a set number of things. Frankly I would LOVE to see every LLM shut down and an unequivocal ban on new ones being developed unless and until some hard legal and enforceable limitations are set to keep them behaving.

You've been hanging out with the wrong people. thenewcuriosityshop.substack.com/p/counting-o...

When have things gotten better?