6 ms·

There’s nothing surprising or confusing here. Outside of tech communities like HN, I see anti-AI rhetoric everywhere. A very large number of humans see AI as a

by thorum 14d ago

There’s nothing surprising or confusing here. Outside of tech communities like HN, I see anti-AI rhetoric everywhere. A very large number of humans see AI as a purely evil and parasitic thing, no matter how it’s used. It’s an especially common view among artists and young people. Whether or not you agree about AI, when you’re communicating to a wider audience, you have to read the room.

raincole 14d ago
It's BlueSky lol. If your way to 'read the room' is to read BlueSky replies then you're already in a pretty doomed position.
- rafram 14d ago
  Yeah, Bluesky is pretty much singlemindedly focused on hating AI at this point. It's odd. Sort of feels like it's becoming a sanctuary (though definitely not a healthy one) for people who just can't deal with the post-2020 world - a lot of yelling about people who don't mask up, who dare to use AI, etc.
  - skybrian 14d ago
    It's possible to tune your Bluesky filter bubble to avoid those people.
- vitorgrs 14d ago
  If you ever tell you use AI on BlueSky, they will put your account on a list to be "shadowbanned" basically.
naasking 14d ago
BlueSky in no way represents a very large number of humans. Most laypeople I've spoken to are fairly neutral on AI at this point.
iamnothere 14d ago
I constantly hear this refrain, but almost everyone I know is insufferably pro-AI. I myself am neutral to skeptical, I think it’s overhyped and only semi-useful (to me personally) but not the end of humanity.
internet2000 14d ago
Bluesky is not real life.
IslandRebel 14d ago
AI haters are basically a very small minority and almost all of them are online. It isn't a large number. There is plenty of skepticism (with any new technology) sure. People often change their attitude to technology when they can see utility in it. > Whether or not you agree about AI, when you’re communicating to a wider audience, you have to read the room. People quite frankly were being arseholes. The AI-haters are as bad as the AI-cultists.
- saghm 14d ago
  > Al haters are basically a very small minority and almost all of them are online. It isn't a large number. Without even getting into the AI part of this claim, how can you have any confidence about a claim like this when there are always going to be several orders of magnitude more people who are online than people you interact with offline? You could replace "AI haters" with "people who live in <continent I don't live in>" and end up with something that's pretty much entirely true in your subjective experience but quite obviously false objectively. How do you tell what's your bubble and what's actually what most people think?
  - IslandRebel 14d ago
    Because the most vocal people are always a minority and I can use my own good judgement. I am also not in any "bubble" group and I am one of those people that are very suspicious of cliques. I spent as much time talking to people that are neutral, positive and negative on AI. Most of the AI haters IME of interacting with them irrational and are full of very poor arguments for their position. Almost all of it is emotional and/or out of ignorance. I've seen the exact same arguments made on US and UK based websites. A lot of AI-skepticism I've encountered IRL/more-normie space comes from fears of what their children will do for work and the large data centre projects being approved by government without enough consultation of local residents. I think these are both valid concerns.
    - saghm 13d ago
      I think you might be misunderstanding what I mean by the word "bubble". It's quite literally impossible to talk to a representative sample of people the size of the internet, so judging purely by people you've interacted with is to me by definition a bubble. The fact that you claim to have sought out conversations with a variety of viewpoints but someone are of the opinion that the people online can't possibly represent a substantial group or are worth taking seriously rather than maybe just people you haven't talked to directly is a bit hard not to be skeptical of.

by thorum 14d ago

raincole 14d ago

It's BlueSky lol. If your way to 'read the room' is to read BlueSky replies then you're already in a pretty doomed position.

rafram 14d ago
Yeah, Bluesky is pretty much singlemindedly focused on hating AI at this point. It's odd. Sort of feels like it's becoming a sanctuary (though definitely not a healthy one) for people who just can't deal with the post-2020 world - a lot of yelling about people who don't mask up, who dare to use AI, etc.
- skybrian 14d ago
  It's possible to tune your Bluesky filter bubble to avoid those people.
vitorgrs 14d ago
If you ever tell you use AI on BlueSky, they will put your account on a list to be "shadowbanned" basically.

naasking 14d ago

BlueSky in no way represents a very large number of humans. Most laypeople I've spoken to are fairly neutral on AI at this point.

iamnothere 14d ago

I constantly hear this refrain, but almost everyone I know is insufferably pro-AI. I myself am neutral to skeptical, I think it’s overhyped and only semi-useful (to me personally) but not the end of humanity.

internet2000 14d ago

Bluesky is not real life.

IslandRebel 14d ago

AI haters are basically a very small minority and almost all of them are online. It isn't a large number. There is plenty of skepticism (with any new technology) sure. People often change their attitude to technology when they can see utility in it. > Whether or not you agree about AI, when you’re communicating to a wider audience, you have to read the room. People quite frankly were being arseholes. The AI-haters are as bad as the AI-cultists.

saghm 14d ago
> Al haters are basically a very small minority and almost all of them are online. It isn't a large number. Without even getting into the AI part of this claim, how can you have any confidence about a claim like this when there are always going to be several orders of magnitude more people who are online than people you interact with offline? You could replace "AI haters" with "people who live in <continent I don't live in>" and end up with something that's pretty much entirely true in your subjective experience but quite obviously false objectively. How do you tell what's your bubble and what's actually what most people think?
- IslandRebel 14d ago
  Because the most vocal people are always a minority and I can use my own good judgement. I am also not in any "bubble" group and I am one of those people that are very suspicious of cliques. I spent as much time talking to people that are neutral, positive and negative on AI. Most of the AI haters IME of interacting with them irrational and are full of very poor arguments for their position. Almost all of it is emotional and/or out of ignorance. I've seen the exact same arguments made on US and UK based websites. A lot of AI-skepticism I've encountered IRL/more-normie space comes from fears of what their children will do for work and the large data centre projects being approved by government without enough consultation of local residents. I think these are both valid concerns.
  - saghm 13d ago
    I think you might be misunderstanding what I mean by the word "bubble". It's quite literally impossible to talk to a representative sample of people the size of the internet, so judging purely by people you've interacted with is to me by definition a bubble. The fact that you claim to have sought out conversations with a variety of viewpoints but someone are of the opinion that the people online can't possibly represent a substantial group or are worth taking seriously rather than maybe just people you haven't talked to directly is a bit hard not to be skeptical of.