[jerrre]

I think a big differences is between

a) tools for professionals/experts where the assumption is the user knows best what it wants, and will spend time figuring out how to reach it

b) the instagram/autotune etc kind of tools that make everyone feel like an expert without doing the work, by providing very nice results for very little effort, but as a user you will very quickly run into the limititions when you form your own opinion.

Many tools that used to be a) now are becoming b) which is nice because it can increase power and productivity for everyone, but the experts and pro's are left behind... What's even worse for them is these simplified tools are often not created by domain experts...

[maxxxxx]

And by becoming b) the designers of the tools can also inject their agenda which is probably often selling more ads or driving up some metric like engagement. The goal of computers used to be to empower people but now it seems just to push people into doing what companies want them to do.

That concerns me about the progress in AI. It won't be used to help us but mainly to manipulate us.

[TeMPOraL]

> which is nice because it can increase power and productivity for everyone, but the experts and pro's are left behind

It's not nice overall, because as those b) tools push out a) tools, it creates an artificial ceiling. Sure, it may be nice to enable a random person to do a new thing for the first time in their lives, but it's not nice if your software prevents those who want to do that thing more than once from being able to do it faster and better. Toys are more approachable than tools, but good works happens with tools; when almost all software tools become toy-like, we have a problem.

[PavlovsCat]

> If people could understand what computing was about, the iPhone would not be a bad thing. But because people don’t understand what computing is about, they think they have it in the iPhone, and that illusion is as bad as the illusion that Guitar Hero is the same as a real guitar.

-- Alan Kay