[jsnell]

This genre of writing is quite hard to engage with productively. It is really long due to throwing everything at the wall. Doesn't matter if the argument is obsolete, a lie, unprovable, or actually a legit and we'll researched complaint. Into the article it goes.

For people who want to believe the author, this flooding the zone approach is catnip. They get the confirmation they need. The people who don't want to believe the author will just dismiss the entire article after the first argument they recognize as invalid.

And for the people in the middle, it's impossible to have a good discussion about the article and get a better understanding because there are too many unrelated arguments packed together. Trying to rebut or support just one of them just feels like a waste of time.

If you're trying to write an effective anti-AI article, it really would be way more effective to pick the 1-2 strongest points (whatever they are).

[s_ting765]

I was frustrated by the author's article but for reasons different than yours. Their title is clickbait and implies a personal viewpoint. I kept reading to see any personal reasons for why they dislike AI. Everything they mention you can google in 5 mins and read for yourself what other people think about AI.

The only personal reason comes at the end where he says he would never log in to use an AI product. The entire rant could have been a tweet.