Rachel B
Student rabbi, former scientist, always a teacher.
- Posts
- 221
- Followers
- 107
- Following
- 100
-
CW: AI
There's a whole separate fight about strengthening both employment rights and the welfare system, so that employers treat workers fairly and losing your job doesn't destroy your life. But that's nothing to do with LLMs, it's not Luddism in either a popular sense or in a positive sense of resistance to imposed automation. Even if every job was completely safe and properly compensated, I would still be upset about being forced to interact with the output of LLMs, let alone directly with the bots
-
CW: AI, healthcare
AI isn't a problem because translators might lose their jobs, but because I want to be able to read text not written in English. It's not a problem because teachers might lose their jobs, but because a world with no teachers means nobody has access to education. It's not a problem because journalists might lose their jobs, but because I want to be informed about the world. It's not even that programmers might lose their jobs: I want to be able to actually use software!
-
Also, there's a serious problem underlying any rhetoric that equates intelligence with moral virtue. The real, physical factors, injuries and diseases which actually damage people's brains are not a sign of, nor a punishment for, being a bad person. That kind of thing goes to horrible eugenic places very fast indeed.
-
Possibly my most unpopular opinion is: there's no such thing as brainrot. Enjoying low-brow media and culture doesn't make you stupid. Interacting with advertising-driven algorithms may cause harm but it doesn't stop your brain working. Using AI to create a simulacrum of output is a bad idea, but I find reports that it somehow degrades your brain or creates a permanent loss of cognitive abilities completely implausible.