My take on AI is, essentially, everybody who’s against it is too against it and everybody who’s for it is too for it.
@danielpunkass and that definitely has nothing to do with polarizing takes awarding attention.
@mattdarveniza @danielpunkass a type of sampling bias, perhaps? Those that are for/against are the most vocal. Those with nuanced opinions might be keeping them to themselves.
@danielpunkass I think it’s useful but also kind of wish LLMs didn’t exist?
@danielpunkass It does seem to elicit a totally disproportional level of irrational response, doesn't it? Ironic.
@danielpunkass im “too against” boiling oceans. Centirst logic. Go figure.
@thejacenallen that’s what I was thinking!
@danielpunkass you're definitely being too in the middle!

@danielpunkass

AI is a term no longer useful. It has become political and meaningless in a the hands of marketers and a public that have no idea what digital algorithms are and are't capable of. Garbage in, garbage out. These are human built tools. Intelligence in this case is a complete misnomer.

@danielpunkass It’s like that bit “everyone who drives slower than me is an idiot and everyone who driver faster than me is a maniac”.
@danielpunkass Do you want a data centre in your back yard?
@CStamp What precisely does that have to do with my post?
@danielpunkass It could affect the balance.
@CStamp I still don't think I understand exactly, but yes, whether businesses land in one's backyard does affect the pro/con. This has been true of everything preceding from dog care lots to nuclear reactors.
@CStamp @danielpunkass nobody wants a railway in their backyard either (a very real problem haunting Germany nowadays).
@danielpunkass It's impossible to be neutral towards LLMs. It feels like magic. I was unimpressed until 2026 rolled around and now I truly think it will change the nature of software engineering.
@danielpunkass So the reductionists and contrarians are wrong?

@danielpunkass That’s probably because there is a multi-trillion dollar grift that’s taking education and jobs and the global economy down with it, using this technology.

If it weren’t for the job- and economy-destroying grift, I don’t think people (like me) would be so strongly against it. The tech is cool. But it is being sold as a tool to addict people, ruin democracies, create new forms of rent-extraction, and undermine the very economic basis of society, while simultaneously worsening the global climate crisis, all so that 20 people can become centibillionaires through massive wealth transfer, and that’s Very Not Cool.

Hope that’s not too against it.

@danielpunkass I think that's true amongst the loudest people. I believe my position is nuanced, and probably not as rare as the noise suggests.
@mattb @danielpunkass Sounds like one of those irregular verbs. He is an extremist. You are a little intemperate. I have a well-informed nuanced point of view.

@danielpunkass Everybody who’s against it is seeing the huge catastrophic downsides. Everybody who’s for it is seeing the potential. Things are complicated, surprise! My take is that most of the downsides have nothing to do with the technology and everything to do with our current politics and capitalism.

But if “AI” is the pointy end of the current politics and capitalism spear that humanity sticks in ourselves in the eye with, I’ll be in the against side.

@danielpunkass Before the revolution starts, though, i have some really cool projects I want have an LLM code for me that I couldn’t make myself.
Generative AI Is Amazing…and Boring. Settle Down. – The Progressive CIO

@danielpunkass that seems like a pretty “enlightened centrist” take which isn’t really a good thing. It comes across as saying “everyone who cares more than me is stupid”
@maxoakland I can see that. FWIW I wasn’t trying to malign anybody. More of a thought exercise. I myself am probably too for it.