Post #3000930
2026-01-26 16:39 UTC
@sarna@types.pl @munificent@mastodon.social Came here to say the same thing. The article keeps saying "assuming the utility is there" - well, is it? Not that it matters to me, I am against AI anyway because programming to me is not at all different from other creative endeavours. You can make any argument about utility in code for utility in (commercial) art as well and it's equally abhorrent to me in either domain. Any domain. Summaries? No. Writing? Hell no. Music? Never. Art? No. Code? No. Any generated code is instant tech debt, a black hole of anti-knowledge in a field which is all about understanding things.
Replies (1)
-
@munificent@mastodon.social 2026-01-29 00:34
@krig@goto.liten.app @sarna@types.pl > The article keeps saying "assuming the utility is there" - well, is it? Assuming that's true let's me make a stronger point about when to use AI. I'm saying even if AI does what it's supposed to and has no negative externalities or societal harms, *even then* there are still many places where I wouldn't want to use it. If we often shouldn't use the best possible AI we can imagine, we should certainly use the worse AIs we actually have even less.