There's a strange vein of aggressive-denialism that anyone could find AI genuinely useful (bordering on miraculous) even if it hasn't yet cured cancer, led to 100% unemployment, solved nuclear fusion, etc.
I still think AI is at root at UI improvement for working with computers. It's an equivalent to the general move of command line interaction to WIMP.
Freaking out over this seems like nothing to me so much as that Tracy/Hepburn movie ... Desk Set.
As are claims like "No one" or "99.9%"
How many times per week are such claims made on HN and in similar forums with respect to software and hardware
curl https://hn.algolia.com/api/v1/search?query=no+one&tags=comment |grep -Eo '\"nbHits\":[0-9]+'
How often do HN commenters use the trivially falsifiable term "everybody"
curl https://hn.algolia.com/api/v1/search?query=everybody&tags=comment|egrep -o '\"nbHits\":[0-9]+'
I read the article but found no hint of "aggressive-denialism that anyone could find AI genuinely useful (bordering on miraculous)"
Instead I found a statement that the author finds AI "incredibly" useful:
"An AI summary would have been incredibly useful"
Where, specifically, is the "aggressive-denialism that anyone could find AI genuinely useful (bordering on miraculous)" in this article
The author's point as I understood it is about "AI" _hype_ not "AI" usefulness. The issue she has is with the _people_ who are hyping "AI" and the actual or potential effects of that hype
UBI used to be a bit of a funny reddit pipe dream. Now it’s a serious long term hypothetical being trialed in the short term and that’s solely as a result of AI progress.
When that result undermines the tenet that capitalism is the root of human suffering, it’s simplest to just reject the result wholesale.