New piece from Dhole Moments: Tech Companies Apparently Do Not Understand Why We Dislike AI

If you’ve heard of him before, its likely from that attempt to derail an NFT project with porn back in 2021.

ETA: Baldur Bjarnason has also commented on it:

This is honestly a pretty sensible take on this all. That it comes from somebody with a “fursona” shouldn’t surprise anybody who has been paying attention.

Hot take: If you voted Labour, this is on you.

The predecessor to Luigi Mangione

Without going into too much detail (because I am not well read on this and am likely to be wrong about a lot of it), one of the many issues that Abe addressed during his leadership was Japan’s declining birthrate.

Presumably, he didn’t address it by dealing with how Japanese work life makes starting a family damn-nigh impossible.

To a capitalist, the greatest sin is paying the worker their fair due.

Quick update on the ongoing copyright suit against OpenAI: The federal judge has publicly sneered at Facebook’s fair use argument:

“You have companies using copyright-protected material to create a product that is capable of producing an infinite number of competing products,” said Chhabria to Meta’s attorneys in a San Francisco court last Thursday.

“You are dramatically changing, you might even say obliterating, the market for that person’s work, and you’re saying that you don’t even have to pay a license to that person… I just don’t understand how that can be fair use.”

The judge itself does seem unconvinced about the material cost of Facebook’s actions, however:

“It seems like you’re asking me to speculate that the market for Sarah Silverman’s memoir will be affected by the billions of things that Llama [Meta’s AI model] will ultimately be capable of producing,” said Chhabria.

Ah, right. Yeah, I can see your point. If it isn’t necessary to survive (e.g. food, water), or it doesn’t have an immediate use case (e.g. ammunition), its probably some form of fiat.

Which actually makes me wonder if those aren’t fiat, too, considering artificial scarcity (De Beers and diamonds, for example).

I can see an argument for considering them fiat. The value of “high-value assets” (e.g. gold) comes from the assumption they’ll retain their value even if things get drastic, not from being immediately useful (e.g. alcohol) or necessary to survive (e.g. water).

PMs

Zero clue what the acronym means in this context.

I think you were trying to reply to this comment

New piece from Brian Merchant: The AI jobs crisis is here, now

As its title implies, its about the wide-ranging job losses caused by the rise of AI.

I agree btw, it will be a big rep damage like how NFTs damaged the idea of cryptocurrencies, and in the same note you saw how a lot of pro-cryptocurrency people disliked NFTs just because they saw this backlash (and the more naked grift of NFTs) coming.

That’s for sure. Given the circumstances, I suspect that its gonna damage the overall public image of software development - beyond suggesting software dev to be full of AI bros, the rise of vibe coding has thrown the software industry’s vibes-based management into sharp relief, making its dysfunctions much harder to ignore.

New thread from Baldur Bjarnason, taking aim at AI coders and vibe coders alike:

Laughing at “AI” boosters worrying “vibe coding” is becoming synonymous with “AI coding”. Tech is vibes througout^[sic]. Vibe management. Vibe strategy. Vibe design. Coding has been a garbage fire for decades and, yeah it’s a vibe-based pop culture from top to bottom and has only been getting worse

Code that does what the end user wants is already the exception. Software is managed on vibes throughout. Anybody who goes huffy because the field OVERWHELMINGLY responds to “vibe coding is using AI to create code that you don’t care about” with “so all coding, gotcha!” has not been paying attention

“Vibe coding is all AI coding” feels true to most because not caring about what happens after it’s pushed to the final victim is already the norm. The only change from adopting “AI” is they now have the freedom to no longer care about what happens BEFORE as well.

“Not everybody in software dev is like that! Some coders genuinely care and put in the work needed to make good software”

True, but I feel confident in saying that next to none of those are leaning hard into “AI coding”

The target market for “AI” is SPECIFICALLY people who don’t care

Giving a personal sidenote, I expect “vibe coding” will stick around as a pejorative after the AI bubble bursts - “AI” has already become synonymous with “zero-effort, low-quality garbage” in the public eye, so re-using “vibe code” to mean “crapping out garbage” isn’t gonna be a difficult task, linguistically speaking.

From Bluesky, an AI slop account calling itself “OC Maker” (well, that’s kinda ironic) has set up shop, and is mass-following artists with original characters (OCs for short):

Shockingly, the artists on Bluesky, who near-universally jumped ship to avoid Twitter stealing their work to feed the AI, are not happy.

It also helps that digital clones are not real people, so their welfare is doubly pointless

This is that “A computer can never be held liable” image writ fucking large. Jesus Christ.

This is completely orthogonal to your point, but I expect the public’s gonna have a much lower opinion of software engineers after this bubble bursts, for a few reasons:

• Right off the bat, they’re gonna have to deal with some severe guilt-by-association. AI has become an inescapable part of the Internet, if not modern life as a whole, and the average experience of dealing with anything AI related has been annoying at best and profoundly negative at worst. Combined with the tech industry going all-in on AI, I can see the entire field of software engineering getting some serious “AI bro” stench all over it.

• The slop-nami has unleashed a torrent of low-grade garbage on the 'Net, whether it be zero-effort “AI art” or paragraphs of low-quality SEO optimised trash, whilst the gen-AI systems responsible for both have received breathless hype/praise from AI bros and tech journos (e.g. Sam Altman’s Ai-generated “metafiction”). Combined with the continous and ongoing theft of artist’s work that made this possible, and the public is given a strong reason to view software engineers as generally incapable of understanding art, if not outright hostile to art and artists as a whole.

• Of course, the massive and ongoing theft of other people’s work to make the gen-AI systems behind said slop-nami possible have likely given people reason to view software engineers as entirely okay with stealing other’s work - especially given the aforementioned theft is done with AI bros’ open endorsement, whether implicitly or explicitly.

The same goes with DuckDuckGo, because the venn diagram of programmers and AI bros is apparently a circle.

Either they’re lying and the number is greatly exaggerated (very possible), or this will eventually destroy the company.

I’m thinking the latter - Silicon Valley is full of true believers, after all.

Update on the University of Zurich’s AI experiment: Reddit’s considering legal action against the researchers behind it.

In terms of actually being useful, an AI data center is also worse than a boat.