[gaigalas]

I think the anger towards AI is completely fabricated.

Where are the new luddites, really? I just don't see them. I see people talking about them, but they never actually show up.

My theory is that they don't actually exist. Their existence would legitimize AI, not bring it down, so AI people fantasize about this imaginary nemesis.

[malfist]

I don't understand how you've read the comments on this page and still think that people that don't like ai are fictitious

[gaigalas]

The internet dislikes a lot of things. It's meaningless.

A substack post is not anger, an HN comment is not breaking machines.

In IT specifically, people who dislike AI are simply not revolting. They're retiring or taking sabbaticals. They're not breaking machinery, they're waiting for the thing to crash and burn on its own.

[malfist]

That's a no true Scotsman mixed with a strawman.

Anger is a lot of things besides intentional sabotage and insurrection

[gaigalas]

Do you believe people actually hate fidget spinners, or it was just internet talk?

Show me manifestations of anger towards AI that actually happened outside of the internet. Some massive strike, some protest, something meaningful.

[tim333]

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/paul-mccartney...

[gaigalas]

Is Paul McCartney an IT worker?

[MSFT_Edging]

Data centers are better guarded than some government institutions. New luddites can't exactly go in smashing the servers.

The actual "new luddites" have been screaming on here for years complaining about losing their careers over immature tech for the sake of reducing labor costs.

[gaigalas]

Where are the organized strikes? The protests on the front of tech companies?

It simply doesn't exist. Tech workers who dislike AI are more indifferent than angry.

[tim333]

Writers strike? https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-hollywood...

[gaigalas]

Fair enough.

I was talking mainly about tech workers though (this website target audience), and I didn't made that distinction in the comment you replied to, but I did make it down the thread way before you replied.

[b0rbb]

I think categorizing Tech Workers as a whole as being synonymous with this website's target audience isn't a correct assumption.

There's some social circles I frequent that are made up of folks that anyone here would qualify as a "Tech Worker" that - and I mean this without any exaggeration - abhor the community of commenters at HN. And I don't mean just folks outside of SV or other major tech hubs. There are people that very much believe the commenters here are the worst people in the industry.

And just to be clear, I'm not of that belief, but it's worth pointing out that the population of Tech Workers on HN isn't going to be indicative of Tech Workers as a whole.

Going back to the previous topic however; Those same people I'm referring to often have a complete overlap with those that are burned out by AI in any form (usage, discussion around it, being advertised to, being forced to use it).

And to some of their concerns, I genuinely empathize with them. That's probably best gone into via something like a blog post or anything else that lends itself to long form writing.

[gaigalas]

> the population of Tech Workers on HN isn't going to be indicative of Tech Workers as a whole

That's why I'm asking for a real world example outside of the internet? It's all weird bubbles here.

Your comment actually strenghtens my critique.

[tim333]

>...without any exaggeration - abhor the community of commenters at HN

How come? We seem a mostly harmless lot?

[MSFT_Edging]

We missed our opportunity to actually organize during the boom as everyone thought their work was above unionization. Now layoffs are weaponized even more than before and the few left over tech jobs are valuable commodities that you hold onto for dear life.

[gaigalas]

Before, you said:

> The actual "new luddites" have been screaming on here for years complaining about losing their careers over immature tech for the sake of reducing labor costs.

Implying that there is a critical organized mass that was aware of the possibility of layoffs.

You also said:

> Data centers are better guarded than some government institutions. New luddites can't exactly go in smashing the servers.

Implying that the only thing stopping this organized mass is the level of security in datacenters.

---

Now you changed your opinion, and you portray a scenario with unhappy disorganized people that missed an opportunity.

I don't understand. It seems that you're just freestyling words.

I stand by my original assessment. This idea of a massive iminent backlash is mostly a fantasy, and although the layoffs are real, they're most likely due to the economic problems the US is facing right now.

Write that down: AI is going to settle into a disappointing miracle (like the microwave), and people will be mostly indifferent to it.

[robocat]

When will the mimes strike...

[Ekaros]

Maybe we have just moved from anger to apathy in general.

[gaigalas]

Really, where was the anger? When did it happened?

I see trash talk. We trash talk microwaves, for example, and that doesn't mean we hate them.

I do believe this supposed anger is fabricated. Not conspiracy style fabricated, just fabricated.

It's just attractive for a technology still full of problems to have an enemy. You can blame stuff on this imaginary enemy. You tell yourself that the guy trash talking your new toy is not right, he's just angry because he's going to lose his job soon, and you sleep better.

I also believe some people buy the existence of that enemy. There idea that people are anxious about losing jobs was repeated ad nauseam, so it stuck. But there is no real world evidence of this anxiety to the levels that it is attributed to.

[jaredcwhite]

You are not a serious person.

[gaigalas]

Can you elaborate?