Post #4060405

2026-07-24 10:22 UTC

As a *technology*, AI isn't exceptional. It's not exceptionally wicked. It's not exceptionally good. Take away the accompanying, galactic-scale stock-swindle, and we'd call AI's applications "plug-ins" and we'd use them and abuse them in the same way that we've used every other technology: https://www.normaltech.ai/ 1/

Replies (2)

@pluralistic@mamot.fr 2026-07-24 10:23

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog: https://pluralistic.net/2026/07/24/supplemental-income/#andrew-tate-gwyneth-paltrow 2/

Open ##4073001
@AVincentInSpace@furry.engineer 2026-07-24 10:27

@pluralistic@mamot.fr I have to say I disagree with you already. Perhaps this is my bias speaking, but it is hard for me not to classify a technology that relies on scraping the works of thousands of creative workers, many of whom are my colleagues, destroying websites and (as of recently) physical paper books in the process without a single care, as exceptionally wicked. Perhaps it is not exceptionally wicked solely because it makes living conditions (cost per kWh, noise, heat...) measurably worse near its factories, whether the residents of those places use the factory's products or not. Plenty of prior technologies have done that -- it's how "smog" became a word. But no prior technology has relied on destructively consuming human culture in order to sustain itself. https://www.404media.co/ai-companies-are-buying-tons-of-old-books-because-theyre-free-of-ai-slop/

Open ##4082418