So, condemning everyone who uses AI is the new purity test for some bubbles now. And it this binary approach makes me sad and scared.
I have seen so many of these rules to define in-groups. You are eating animal products? How can you, killing the climate. You are not using the exact expected set of content warnings? How can you be so ignorant. You are shaving your legs as a woman? How antifeminist of you. You are using a car? How can you justify all the bad impact of this.
@sophie Yes this worries me as well, I even used to be this kind of condemner...
Unsurprisingly, going to therapy has helped.
Now I just avoid the technology and will keep avoiding it. But condemning people is like condemning someone for having a gambling addiction, since that's what this technology is: They hurt most the people who have low self-esteem or get easily addicted to something.
It's the companies, not the users.
@aks @sophie True, but I would caution that it's still probably a good idea to speak out against some promoters of it - if someone with a gambling addiction is trying to convince you to spend your money at a casino because it'll make you rich, it's probably a good idea not to listen to them. And if they're doing so to someone you care about, you may want to step in as well.
That is how I see a lot of pro-AI stuff - someone may be a victim, sure. But that doesn't make you a bad person trying to stop them victimizing someone else, or for trying to suggest ways they can get real help.
Joining in, encouraging others to join in, or downplaying the harms - like suggesting ChatGPT is better than a doctor - is wrong and always will be, imo.
@trekkie1701c Since I initialized a policy to ban AI contributions from a bunch of software projects, I think you are preaching to the Choir here.
Also, 'bad people' or 'good people' don't exist. That's just a dangerous concept to oversimplify humans.
Sophie
Akseli 
trekkie1701c