Hi, we still exist. I still build old shit to do things it's not supposed to do. We're not going away.
this post was submitted on 23 May 2025
230 points (92.6% liked)
Technology
70285 readers
3030 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I get when people say: "hey, this happened with every new tech..." But this one in particular gas many inherent problems: it's built on stolen material, it doesn't encourage critical thinking and it will create mini socio cognitive bubbles, distancing each other more and more. It's built that way because the people that makes it want it to be like that.
You lose me at stolen. If we are talking code anyway.
Of all the arguments against AI this is not one of them that holds any water. Copyright is bullshit and AI proved it in a very visceral way.
Plenty of good reasons to hate AI besides Intellectual Property.
We have laws out the ass for every stupid thing. Bureaucracy so heavy that it prevents many people from even attempting to compete. AI is the first realistic means of bypassing it, its going to be a renaissance of innovation and productivity from the bottom up. You worry about Disney movies being displaced and intellectual property being breached, but we won't need corporations like Disney when this matures.
"AI is the first realistic means of bypassing [laws and bureaucracy]"
Huge disagreement on all fronts.
The AI companies state in their Terms of Service broadly that users have commercial rights to their prompt outputs, and can even copyright them - while also keeping the output for their own data naturally. It doesn't bypass laws or bureaucracy.. At all. Rather its the billionaires trying to steal all creative arts, coding, and any other industry works they can manage - and package into their "same but slightly different" slop that outcompetes the original creators - with no protection given to those creators whose original has been copied without any kind of compensation or agreement. Its another wealth transfer.
One of many problems the article points out - they don't invent anything, it's all just regurgitations of past work. This is the path of stagnation, not innovation.
Not all AI is made equally. There are locally-run Apache licensed LLMs.
When you outsource the thinking, you outsource the learning.
Stealing this because it manages to put technical concerns into hand-waving manager speak.
And a pretty solid article. I think leaning on micro-enhancements to performance a little to hard at the end but the rest jibes with my experiences working in a large company where non-technical bloviators are leading the charge of changing the landscape of a field they don't understand and have no training in.
"We're bringing AI to OKRs!" they say hungrily, as their weak arms attempt to pull the rug.
"Sure you are", I say, pretending to stumble.
That rather sounds like it was written by an ai?
You're the only human Lemmy user.
It amazes me how often I see the argument that people react this way to all tech. To some extent that's true, but it assumes that all tech turns out to be useful. History is littered with technologies that either didn't work or didn't turn out to serve any real purpose. This is why we're all riding around in giant mono-wheel vehicles and Segways.
Old man shakes hands at clouds.
You can still do things the old way, AI existing does not impact your ability to do so.
People still make mechanical watches by hand. People choose to carve things instead of 3D printing them. People choose to drive stick instead of automatic.
I think at most of the disdain comes from the business side. Sure I can opt out of AI at home but at work I'm constantly getting asked how AI has helped my productivity and potentially "graded" on how much or how effectively I use it. Business doesn't care about your personal fulfillment, just your productivity, and if they grind you into dust to w acchere you no longer find any joy or motivation in your work they'll get the next college graduate that's already used AI for 80% of their assignments and wonder why quality has tanked, integrations are failing, security breaches are up, and energy costs have doubled.
A coworker that regularly uses AI code assistants asked me to review 78 brand new files he made. That really puts my back against the wall. Do I spend a day going through everything "the old way"? Do I ask AI to summarize each function to bridge the gap in knowledge? Do I ask it, file by file, if it sees any issues? Or do I just rubber stamp it because I should the million-dollar product my boss thinks I should use more than Google or official docs?
PRs still need to be reasonable size for human review, regardless of how they were authored. IMO
Yeah but when you complain you are seen as slowing down progress. Your college wrote all of this useful code and now you are blocking it from being deployed? Our shareholders want to know that we are winning the AI race so we need to release this feature asap. How can we unblock this? I have added 3 new engineers to the team let's make sure this gets out today!!
The man-hour myth will never die in the management class
Tell your coworker to review it with his AI and then ship it.
Yeah like I’m a lot cooler on the AI hype than most but the articles argument is weak. This is the same shit people were saying when SO and Google were gaining traction. Surprisingly having one tool does not limit people from digging further into internals
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(8 replies)
I'm more and more distancing myself with computers, it already was "use this library", then use this app, now it seems just ask the "AI".
I took up painting and chess, viable replacements I hope.
The thing I hate the most about the printing press and its ease of access: the slow, painful death of the scribe's soul—brought not by war or scarcity, but by convenience. By type. By machines. [...]
There was once magic here. There was once madness.
Monks would stay up all night in candlelit scriptoriums with bloodshot eyes, trying to render illuminated manuscripts without smudging their life's work. They cared. They would mix pigments from crushed beetles just to see if they'd hold. They knew the smell of burnt parchment and the exact angle of quill where their hand would cramp after six hours. These were artists. They wrote letters like master craftsmen—full of devotion, precision, and divine chaos.
Now? We're building a world where that devotion gets mechanized at the door. Some poor bastard—born to be great—is going to get told to "review this Gutenberg broadsheet" for eight hours a day, until all that wonder calcifies into apathy. The scriptorium will become a print shop. The quill a lever.
The slow, painful death of technological privacy - brought not by war, not by scarcity, but by convenience of another app that saves you 3 clicks per transaction paired with the forced usage of certain functions within an existing environment
load more comments
(7 replies)
it's ease
well-written
You sure? We do not applaud the tenor who cannot clear his throat.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›