Discussion
Loading...
@reiver and, I would like to add, who they're politically supporting with that money
you know, after half a lifetime working in varying roles that amount to "making tech work for humans" ... the root cause is nearly always somewhere in the wetware.
Technology - tools, be it a hammer or some fantastical concept of an AI doctor to cure all your meat-suit mishaps - are not neutral because they are all human-created and human used. Even this one.
We've just unleashed a particularly large hammer, and allowed it into the hands of a abusive subset of us.
When it comes to fediverse there are roughly 2 crowds. One who thinks fedi is ready for scale and should be growth-hacked asap to offer alternatives and safe refuge to the masses of people locked into corporate social media walled gardens.
And a group who thinks this rapid upscaling is not yet possible without the fediverse suffering a hostile corporate takeover, and enshittification process.
AI finally makes fedi rapidly accessible for newcomer devs, but increases that risk.
@smallcircles @fedicat @reiver
The question is: Do people even know what they are doing? Can they guarantee and ensure reliability, security, data protection and smooth operation in a network?
Unserious #ThoughtProvoker of sorts..
How about letting #AI - guided along by some protocol experts to formulate good prompts - maintain and evolve the open standard specs based on all the info the AI has sucked up from all the FOSS projects that are implementing #ActivityPub.
(Note that I am wary of AI for a whole host of reasons, mostly all relating to its disruptive introduction and its potential dehumanising effect, eroding social cohesion and connection between people.)
Re: Fediverse & AI Coding Tools & Vibe Coding
@smallcircles@social.coop AI is exceedingly good at being a sounding board for ideas. You just need to get past the relentless sycophantic responses, and think critically about each response.
If you even hint at it, AI will gladly tell you how to build a hammer to solve all your problems.
The problem is that some people use AI as a shortcut to no longer think.
cc @reiver@mastodon.social @fedicat@pc.cafe @johannab@cosocial.ca
@julian @smallcircles @fedicat
Wow have I ever had an unexpected week of relating to this ... I'm trying to write a blog post and it's a bit raw so it's not going in a post-thread.
But i very very much ended tonight with a lot more despair about the wider world when it comes to letting everyone and their uncle's monkey loose with "AI" coding.
Tomorrow's going to more fun, as I start a Google-sponsored "futures lab" fellowship .. all about prototyping vibe-coded apps for education.
@julian @smallcircles @fedicat
I am pretty sure I'll be relegated to the role of the curmudgeon in the basement computer room just devoting my remaining life to organizing and colour-coding cables at the backs of all the racks, and insulting young students like they handed in their punch-cards out of sequence. 馃槅
@julian @reiver @fedicat @johannab
Yes, I've tried AI as a brainstorming assistant, and if you keep a keen eye on the conversation it works great. And there are many other good uses too.
But I feel that the net effect of AI on the fabric of our society will be quite negative, making regular people overly reliant on exploitative technology they do not own.
Huge AI bubble or not, it may be a passed station, and AI here to stay. Tech comes 1st, technology progress decoupled from human progress.
@julian @reiver @fedicat @johannab
> The problem is that some people use AI as a shortcut to no longer think.
The issue is bigger than that, I think. One needs expertise to work with AI responsibly, and recognize where it goes off the rails. In our own expert areas we invested the time to be able to correct AI output.
In all other areas, where we'll have to use hastily-introduced AI, we too are unable to detect its flaws. While AI poses as expert on anything, and is integrated everywhere.
1 more replies (not shown)
(My opinion is that AI as introduced today constitutes inhumane technology, that serves to prolong hypercapitalism and the status quo of ever increasing wealth inequality. It is dangerous technology in how it disempowers people who come to rely on the technology, while it is wholly owned by all-powerful Big Tech megacorporations and their billionaire owner class.)