I’ll be adding this to the presentation.

Yes.

Imagine the power of Joseph Goebbels’ propaganda machine, but with superintelligence behind the wheel and zero friction. That’s where we’re heading.

And with two sentences the entire article is rendered a joke.

Really? You literally posted something against the rules of a community and you’re using that as your excuse?! “CO2 spreads outside of the USA!”

My next phone (probably in another two years) will likely be running HarmonyOS. My next PC (even farther off) is also likely to be running HarmonyOS.

Or the original poster was going by what is commonly referred to as AI today and not the multi-generational tree of technologies that fall under the academic definition of AI.

Register is a thing.

You know, I’ve seen many examples of “Expert Blindness” before, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen a single example that so perfectly encapsulates it.

Bravo! Mind if I use this message in our weekly messaging get-together at work?

AI is the new Crypto. If you are vaguely associated with it, I assume there’s something criminal going on

Nothing to add here. I just like this so much that I want it duplicated.

Every time I get wind of people using “AI” (in any of its forms thus far!) for doing any kind of serious foreign policy/military work, I get shadows of Whoops Apocalypse.

Use of the intentional stance is perfectly justified in this kind of situation.

Dude, in case my breakdown of your argumentation style didn’t make it clear: piss off. You’re a dishonest grifter with no opinion anybody should be paying attention to. Your parents should be ashamed of their accidental conception of you. AND you’re stupid enough to push AI bullshit in a group literally called “Fuck AI”.

Go away. Your mother is calling you.

…

Oops. She just called you something else.

Given where I live, I suspect my future computers are going to be something called Risk-v inside. Running HarmonyOS.

Which suits me fine as I de-USAify the rest of my life as my phone and my computer age beyond utility.

I was bored and aggressive techbrodudes annoy me. It was a good combination.

OK, so I ran this past a techie colleague. Here’s how he summarized this for me.

• @jagged_circle@feddit.nl is drawing a superficial parrallel between CPU speculation and LLM/AI unpredictability without acknowledging the crucial differences in determinism, transparency, and user experience.
• He’s relying on the likelihood that others in the conversation may not know the technical details of “CPU speculation”, allowing him to sound authoritative and dismissive (“this is old news, you just don’t get it”).
• By invoking an obscure technical concept and presenting it as a “gotcha,” he positions himself as the more knowledgeable, sophisticated participant, implicitly belittling others’ concerns as naïve or uninformed.

He is in short using bad faith argumentation. He’s not engaging with the actual objection (AI unpredictability and user control), but instead is derailing the conversation with a misleading-to-flatly-invalid analogy that serves more to showcase his own purported expertise than to clarify or resolve the issue.

The techniques he’s using are:

• Jargon as Gatekeeping:
  Using technical jargon or niche knowledge to shut down criticism or skepticism, rather than to inform or educate.

• False Equivalence:
  Pretending two things are the same because they share a superficial trait, when their real-world implications and mechanics are fundamentally different.

• Intellectual One-upmanship:
  The goal isn’t to foster understanding, but to “win” the exchange and reinforce a sense of superiority.

Explaining his bad objection in plain English, he’s basically saying “You’re complaining about computers guessing? Ha! They’ve always done that, you just don’t know enough to appreciate it.” But in reality, he’s glossing over the fact that:

• CPU speculation is deterministic, traceable, and (usually) invisible to the user.

• LLM/AI “guessing” is probabilistic, opaque, and often the source of user frustration.

• The analogy is invalid, and the rhetorical move is more about ego than substance.

TL;DR: @jagged_circle@feddit.nl is using his technical knowledge not to clarify, but to obfuscate and assert dominance in the conversation without regard to truth, a pretty much straightforward techbrodude move.

Wait till you find out which group you’re posting your degenerative AI fanboi grift in.

No idea what an aarch64 is, but I upvoted you anyway because you seem so happy! 🤣

That’s a really weird take. Like really weird, because it presupposes that everybody wants to use degenerative AI at all.

Which is emphatically not the case. There’s even studies showing that most people play with degenerative AI for a while, all impressed by it, before trailing off as it turns out that it kind of sucks at everything people try to use it for.

Degenerative AI is the crypto/web3 of the current set of techbrodude nitwits. A solution in search of a problem. And it will go the way of crypto/web3.

It was pretty obvious that this would never be a real job given that degenerative AIs change the prompting systems more often than healthy normal people (so, you know, not degenerative AI freaks) change their underwear.

💯

If I see “AI” on a product (like those weird “AI” mice) I put it down and select another.

At the very least he’s away on business.