Pretty much this. I work in support services in an industry that can’t really use AI to resolve issues due to the myriad of different deployment types and end user configurations.

No way in hell will I be out of a job due to AI replacing me.

What's worse is these people who shill AI and genuinely are convinced Chat GPT and stuff are going to take over the world will not feel an ounce of shame once AI dies just like the last fad.

If I was wrong about AI being completely useless and how its not going to take over the world, I'd feel ashamed at my own ignorance.

Good thing I'm right.

I wanna expand on this a bit because it was a rush job.

This part...

Learning AI and Building on chain start with deciding which product you’re going to base your learning/building on and which products you’re going to learn to achieve that. Something that has no stability and never will.

...is a bit wrong. The AI environment has no stability now because it's a mess of products fighting for sensationalist attention. But if it ever gains stability, as in there being a single starting point for learning AI, it will be because a product, or a brand, won. You'll be learning a product just like people learned Flash.

Seeing people in here talk about CoPilot or ChatGPT and examples of how they have found it useful is exactly why we're going to find ourselves in a situation where software products discourage any kind of unconventional or experimental ways of doing things. Coding isn't a clean separation between mundane, repetitive, pattern-based, automatable tasks and R&D style, hacking, or inventiveness. It's a recipe for applying the "wordpress theme" problem to everything where the stuff you like to do, where your creativity drives you, becomes a living hell. Like trying to customise a wordpress theme to do something it wasn't designed to do.

The stories of chatgpt helping you out of a bind are the exact stories that companies like openAI will let you tell to advertise for them, but they'll never go all in on making their product really good at those things because then you'll be able to point at them and say "ahah! it can't do this stuff!"

Forgot to pivot to video! Shorts, no longform content, no shorts again!

Isn't it great how they aren't saying how to "learn" or "accept" AI? They aren't saying: "learn what a neural network is" or anything close to that. It's not even: "Understand what AI does and its output and what that could be good or bad for". They're just saying, "Learn how to write AI prompts. No, I don't care if it's not relevant or useful, and it's your fault if you can't leverage that into job security." They're also saying: "be prepared to uproot your entire career in case your CEO tries to replace you, and be prepared to change careers completely. When the AI companies we run replace you, it's not our fault because we warned you." It's so fucking sad that these people are allowed to have opinions. Also this:

For people like Deschatelets, it doesn't feel that straightforward.

"There's nothing to adapt to. To me, writing in three to four prompts to make an image is nothing. There's nothing to learn. It's too easy," he said.

His argument is the current technology can't help him — he only sees it being used to replace him. He finds AI programs that can prompt engineered images, for example, useful when looking for inspiration, but aside from that, it's not much use.

"It's almost treating art as if it's a problem. The only problem that we're having is because of greedy CEOs [of Hollywood studios or publishing houses] who make millions and millions of dollars, but they want to make more money, so they'll cut the artists completely. That's the problem," he said.

A king. This should be the whole article.

"Did you mean: sappho's law" no but I wish I did