(I'm going to guess you mean generative AI such as image/video/text generation used to create slop on Facebook, but I really wish posts like this would clarify.)
I think this post is vague enough for each one of us to think about the part we are sick of and relate. I'm sick of generative for sure.. but then again [0]:
> Everyone seems to have their own personal definition of acceptable AI use. If you Vibecode an entire app, it's because you are lazy and unskilled. But use AI for code review and writing tests? You are smart and efficient.
> You could use AI to remove photo backgrounds or clean up artifacts, that's just good editing. But generating an image for your blog post? You are stealing from hardworking artists. You are a fraud! You probably use AI as a writing assistant like a monster. But using it to generate documentation from your code is indispensable.
Because "I really wish posts like this would clarify".
I was making a point that saying "I hate AI" is intellectually lazy. The discourse here can be a whole lot better if people put more effort into clarity.
I want Hacker News to be a better place for technically sophisticated conversations than most of Reddit.
But you know exactly which form of AI is exhausting everyone through mediocre application. You know exactly which form of AI requires constant propaganda and astroturfing to get a thimble of adoption.
I think generative AI for slop posts and images on Facebook is a different issue from generative AI for coding agents, even when they share the same underlying models.