So in your opinion, these are analogous things:
1. High pressure juicer aimed at rich people seeking status.
2. Revolutionary tool that already dramatically changed everything from all of high learning institutions to the way office work is done.
May I suggest that you're at least one if not multiple of the following:
1. Stupid.
2. Gullible.
3. Extremely emotionally invested to the point of becoming both 1 and 2.
Not only is this a non sequitur, but GLP-1 agonists are solving this very problem right now.
Enabled in large part by explosive growth in hyper intelligence humans, and general amount of humans there is increasing capital that can be invested in those few hyper intelligent ones.
To add to my previous statement, as I suspect one omission I left out will be immediately screeched at as a norm considering your posting history:
People like this can be subject matter experts. What they cannot be is actual senior developers who's duty is to lead a developer team. When you hire a junior dev, you're not a teacher. You're an employer and a leader.
And what I'm referring to is that mindsets of those two are completely different. This is in fact the very difference that leads to the meme of "those who can't do, teach".
Senior dev who needs some mundane work done for an ongoing project doesn't give a single fuck about whoever gets hired for the project being the best learner or the worst learner in the world.
He cares about junior dev performing the task he's hired for. That's the beginning and the end of caring. The rest is "why won't you think of long term future of strangers, and put it on a pedestal above performing your actual work".
People like that don't get to be senior devs for a very simple reason. They cannot perform in that role, because they cannot prioritize performing that role over random wishy washy feel good nonsense. And so they don't matter when the question is "what do senior devs do".
The hilarity of "shunned everywhere" as we hear both about mass layoffs of junior office workers, the fact that professors are all screaming that basically all students use AI for the assignments to the point where it's newsworthy when one student is found that doesn't...
Reminder: the actual subject is bubbles. You're in one.
And you opened with a lie. No one said anything about "enjoying" AI. In fact, I can't think of anyone who "enjoyed" email either. I'm sure there were dozens of such people worldwide though.
The rest just saw a tool to do thing they needed to do, but do more of it in less time, do it better, and make their life easier, and so they implemented the new tool. That's it.
But as I mentioned above, I'm sure there are dozens of people like you who use specific things at work out of sheer enjoyment. Actually, I'm wrong. There are tens to hundreds of thousands of them. Almost all come from a single field: demolition.
Not so much in office work though. There tool are almost never about enjoyment, and instead about minimizing annoyance of work.
When question includes multiple variables and suggests that they're mutually exclusive when they're not, the answer is "yes, all of the variables".
Silver bullets are just as good at point blank shots in the back of the head from a Nagant M1895 as other bullets.
So I imagine reaction is still going to be "fall into the mass grave".
Start with the first one. He even understands how indefensible that claim is, as he immediately adds in brackets that he will not defend his take, likely because he has in fact tried defending it before and failing every time. Because it is in fact indefensible, at least so far from what we know about machine learning and attempts to block it on grounds cited.
I'm disappointed that you only referenced WEF and not the rest of the cabal. C'mon, the pass with Alex Jones name drop was perfect. Do better.
"I'm moral" virtue signalling claim, followed by some of the most immoral, most anti-human takes a human being can have. Where have I seen this before?
Oh wait, that's entire last decade of political discourse online. I have seen this literally everywhere.
Did you write this with an AI? Probably not, because it could write it better, since it's really good at writing short popular fiction.
Granbpa, this is 2018 shit, before current gen LLMs.
Get on with the times.
Watching people rapidly retreat deeper and deeper into their shrinking luddite bubbles reminds me of the "no one I know likes email, paper mail is obviously superior" argument every office had in the 1990s.
I still remember one guy who was just dead set on paper for everything. As his bubble shrunk so much that he got left out of almost all communications as most things moved to email and only very important and special things were discussed via paper mail and notes, he eventually got laid off because he just couldn't perform without proper communication with the rest of the team.
I suspect "I know no one who likes AI" crowd will face the same selection pressure. Most will eventually move to the new better system, and the handful of luddites will eventually be let go for being unable to keep up with the rest.
Just like a junior coder.
In that generation, that is the current default. She doesn't have to say it. She just has to not deny it outright.
You have to get your information somewhere after all. You're not a world into yourself.
Now to be fair, it's also possible that she gets her views from Alex Jones. After all, she is a massive outlier from her peer group. But it's just as unlikely as her not getting her views from mainstream youth-oriented curated social media networks.
This login session: $13.99
