[shitloadofbooks]

AI proponents keep drawing perfectly straight lines from "no AI --> LLMs exist --> LLMs write some adequate code sometimes" up into the horizon of the Y axis where AIs run all governments, write all code, paint all paintings and so on.

There's a large overlap with the crypto true-believers who were convinced after seeing "no blockchain --> blockchain exists" that all laws would be enshrined in the blockchain, all business would be done with blockchains, etc.

We've had automation in the past; it didn't decimate the labour-force; it just changed how people work.

And we didn't go from handwashing clothes --> washing machines --> all flat surfaces are cleaned daily by washing robots...

[refulgentis]

Would advise, generally, that AI isn't crypto.

It's easy to lapse into personifying it and caricaturing the-thing-in-toto, but then we end up at obvious absurdities - to wit:

- we're on HN, it'd be news to most readers that there's a "large overlap" of "true-believers", AI was a regular discussion topic here a loooong time before ChatGPT, even OpenAI. (been here since 2009)

- Similarly "AI proponents keep drawing perfectly straight lines...AIs run all governments, write all code, paint all paintings and so on."

The technical term would be "strawmen", I believe.

Or maybe begging the question (who are these true-believers who overlap? who are these AI proponents)

Either way, you're not likely to find these easy-to-knock-down caricatures on HN. Maybe some college hypebeast on Twitter. But not here.

[mystified5016]

I have personally seen all of these people on HN.

[refulgentis]

Right - more directly, asserting they're overlapping, and then asserting all members of both sets all back the same obviously-wrong argument(s) is a recipe for dull responses from ilk like me :)

I am certain you have observed N members of each set. It's the rest that doesn't follow.