“I’m not a Luddite, you’re a loser!” Nice. You sure showed him that your critical analysis skills are superior. If you’re not a Luddite, then why do you see yourself in that comment? You’re self-identifying at this point.
“Mooooooom. This guy called me Luddite on the internet again!!!”
I hope you are happy now, she is literally crying.
Anyway, is that all? I expected that your LLM would come up with refutations 20 times faster and yet I am sitting here waiting for why I’m wrong. Would you like to criticize my gas-guzzling vehicle next while you defend billion dollar AI industries on why global warming is the consumers’ fault? Perhaps that will defend your planet-destroying behavior.
See, you are arguing from your feelings. You are assuming that anyone who criticizes your position necessarily has a bunch of other qualities. You’re arguing against a voice in your head, not me. I haven’t used AI in months. You don’t know a damn thing about me, but your arguments are suddenly all about me. As though the things I do and think have any bearing on the validity of my claims. As though you can just ad hominem yourself out of this situation. Why not call me a loser too? That’ll do it.
Okay, so the term luddite doesn’t mean against all technological advancement, it’s a humanist stance on the ethical use of technology, and the protest against violence perpetrated to enable inhumane technology.
luddite doesn’t mean against all technological advancement, it’s a humanist stance on the ethical use of technology,
it does not - lets not rewrite history here. Luddites failed because destroying stuff doesn’t really work and that’s the lesson we should take. It’s easy to complain and break things but that doesn’t help anyone, real value comes from real efforts and real visions.
“I’m not a Luddite, you’re a loser!” Nice. You sure showed him that your critical analysis skills are superior. If you’re not a Luddite, then why do you see yourself in that comment? You’re self-identifying at this point.
“Mooooooom. This guy called me Luddite on the internet again!!!”
I hope you are happy now, she is literally crying.
Anyway, is that all? I expected that your LLM would come up with refutations 20 times faster and yet I am sitting here waiting for why I’m wrong. Would you like to criticize my gas-guzzling vehicle next while you defend billion dollar AI industries on why global warming is the consumers’ fault? Perhaps that will defend your planet-destroying behavior.
See, you are arguing from your feelings. You are assuming that anyone who criticizes your position necessarily has a bunch of other qualities. You’re arguing against a voice in your head, not me. I haven’t used AI in months. You don’t know a damn thing about me, but your arguments are suddenly all about me. As though the things I do and think have any bearing on the validity of my claims. As though you can just ad hominem yourself out of this situation. Why not call me a loser too? That’ll do it.
Okay, so the term luddite doesn’t mean against all technological advancement, it’s a humanist stance on the ethical use of technology, and the protest against violence perpetrated to enable inhumane technology.
So if you’re going to cast insults, understand that the Luddites were on the side of society in the industrial revolution
If cogsuckers knew what words meant they wouldn’t need their clanker overlords to tell them what to think.
it does not - lets not rewrite history here. Luddites failed because destroying stuff doesn’t really work and that’s the lesson we should take. It’s easy to complain and break things but that doesn’t help anyone, real value comes from real efforts and real visions.
the real value comes from the stakeholders obviously
So, the destruction of the planet is fine, but the defense against it is not. Gotcha
Small brained take