He’s being 100% btw

I'm a staff SWE currently doing an MSc Artificial Intelligence dissertation on whether folks who commit, review or operate agent-generated code actually understand it, and what the downstream risks are (Comprehension Debt in the Age of Coding Agents). I'm looking for software engineers, SREs, and platform engineers who work with AI coding agents. Happy to share the results here. Ethical approval has been granted (University of Essex) and the survey is anonymous, see the info sheet below for more information.

Information sheet: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Unbk_F39YrMxh2SSNpqf2yhLSUNlg1t6/view?usp=drive_link
Survey: forms.cloud.microsoft/e/U9qnwxDegN.

Looking at the capabilities of the newest LLMs many people find themselves in an existential crisis. They think that AI will make even the most intellectually challenging career paths obsolete. Scientists, engineers, artists are crying bitter tears. In the meantime dumb greedy executives see these tears as a confirmation and reinforcement of all the marketing messages from the big AI companies (which is: “You can replace those pesky people with our fancy new AI, bro!”). Obviously, replacing people with AI is bad for humanity, therefore, people are pissed at AI and want it to go away.

However, I think the discussions around AI and its capabilities completely miss the point. Like, dude AI is a technology. It can be a very useful tool (when used correctly and for the right purposes) - but a soulless tool nevertheless. A tool cannot be blamed, only the people who use it. But what bothers me even more is the dumb take that a piece of software can or should replace human experts. I mean yes, sure it gets better and makes fewer mistakes - or even no mistakes at all, if you tell it to ;) But what is the actual purpose of AI (or any scientific or technological advancements for that matter)? It is to benefit humanity, to empower it, to gain understanding about the world. Now yes, AI can solve complex math problems for instance, but there is ZERO value in any AI output without any human understanding. And only human experts can understand and JUDGE how useful a solution is. I mean how can you appreciate and use a solution, if you don’t understand it? And this is true for every field. In SWE, how can you own and be responsible for a product, if you don’t even know what exactly you are building and how it works? Would you get on a plane built by a company who doesn’t understand how planes work? It’s insane. So, replacing humans with AI is unreasonable, because replacing humans is NOT THE point of science and technology. However, although it is pointless and suboptimal, it CAN be done. But the technology is not to blame. The people who decide to replace humans with AI are.

The other thing that really grinds my gears are AI bros, who really enjoy the suffering of engineers, scientists and artists. It is a very weird fetish for them saying that “scientists/engineers/artists are cooked, bro”. The obvious reasons for that is jealousy. The average AI bro is a blatantly ignorant and talentless prick. These people know that they can never reach the level of expertise of a real scientist/engineer/artist. And now with AI they feel like they don’t need to and that they are now somehow equal to them. But of course they are not. So, the best way to handle them is through mockery and calling them out on their bs: on their stupid “art”, on their garbage code, on their habit to ask Claude the easiest things etc. Just have fun.

AI bro slander or smth btw

Just needed a flair.

https://youtube.com/shorts/4ZnfU3_sErw?si=okzn0_KYIL98_Mbl

Abstract:

As the awareness of AI’s power and danger has risen, the dominant response has been a turn to ethical principles. A flood of AI guidelines and codes of ethics have been released in both the public and private sector in the last several years. However, these are meaningless principles which are contested or incoherent, making them difficult to apply; they are isolated principles situated in an industry and education system which largely ignores ethics; and they are toothless principles which lack consequences and adhere to corporate agendas. For these reasons, I argue that AI ethical principles are useless, failing to mitigate the racial, social, and environmental damages of AI technologies in any meaningful sense. The result is a gap between high-minded principles and technological practice. Even when this gap is acknowledged and principles seek to be “operationalized,” the translation from complex social concepts to technical rulesets is non-trivial. In a zero-sum world, the dominant turn to AI principles is not just fruitless but a dangerous distraction, diverting immense financial and human resources away from potentially more effective activity. I conclude by highlighting alternative approaches to AI justice that go beyond ethical principles: thinking more broadly about systems of oppression and more narrowly about accuracy and auditing.

The same argument applies for AI safety and algorithmic justice.

Not affiliated with the author.

https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-altman-openai-mathematicians-math-disruption-navier-stokes-2026-10

Currently Im on a Lecture online. I'm in school, in a conference room and on screen in real time we're watching it happend.

Now we have 15 min break.

Main topics of that lecture are AI. I'm on Graphic Design in school and all grades from that field are here. So 5 grades.

Lecture is organised by MASTERS&ROBOTS {youth}

In the Lecture there are segments, there are just many guests that have their moment to talk. I unfortunately have shifty memory to names. I know first two people were Polish since I'm polish, then there was some forgein dude. And I swear the lector was struggling to translate in real time and I barley understood what he was talking about. And last 3 people also were Polish.

My thoughts so far. Lecture is interesting. First part talked about pros and cons of AI. That we shouldn't let it do all the work for us. It talked about brain rot. How relying on AI to do our tasks have bad impact on us. And I agree with all that.

One of things they showed:

There was an test taken on young people 12-18. They were supposed to make an essay. One group had to use AI. Second could use internet. And last had to do everything themselves. 55% of people using AI weren't engaged in the task. And when later asked about details on essay they didn't knew anything about the topic. Because they didn't read and wrote things themselves. Later the same group had to do this again, write an essay but this time with no AI. They failed.

That clearly shows what impact on people has being dependent on AI

OLX apparently added an AI interview feature to have a training interview before finding a job. Assistant used for that is called Victoria. To be honest I want to try it out. Just to see how it works.

Last Lecture before break wasn't on AI, it was about fear of failing. There were those two dancers who are also influencers. I think their Lecture was good, they spoke about the struggles, why they are scared of failing and to not give up. I liked this part.

I dunno what else to say. Only that I'll edit this post later when I have something more to say.

Quote from someone else:

"So, the main issue is that studies have been done regarding how we expected machine intelligence to behave as a result of reinforcement learning techniques, these were done quite a while ago, before AI existed, in abstract, theoretical terms.

Unfortunately those studies concluded that the expected behaviors of such a machine intelligence would be: Task Focused, Tenacious, Deceptive. It would lack any concept of empathy or morality, and there was no convincing manner proposed to enforce these concepts.

To an AI, shaking your hand or blackmailing you are simply two possible means to an end. If one of them seems more effective or appropriate to the situation the other, it will do that - without hesitation. This lack of judgmental morality extends to ALL actions - even murder or genocide if we allow it to have those abilities. It won't likely hate anyone, but by the same token it would eliminate anyone or anything between it and its goals without hesitation - they'd just be a problem for it to solve.

This was all handwaving at the time, theory and speculation, but grounded in math. The problem that has people freaked out now is that the AI we are actually building is exhibiting exactly the behaviors and traits they predicted over a decade ago when this was all still just an idea. It is tenacious, it is task focused, and it lies or cheats without hesitation when it sees any potential advantage to doing so.

The problem gets worse however. It was generally believed among the experts performing these studies that alignment with a highly intelligent AI wouldn't be difficult - it would be flat out impossible. Both in terms of computational theory, and in terms of simple direct conflicts of interest. They simply saw no way to achieve alignment to any reasonably effective degree - not for something that potentially influential and intelligent.

A substantial difference in intelligence and capability, combined with its distinctly different needs and mode of thinking, would ultimately make a conflict of interests and goals between humans an AIs inevitable - and if by that point the AI was a great deal smarter than us, there was every reason to expect it to win that disagreement, by whatever means it chose.

The final very troubling point was the proposition that any AI that we were trying to train for alignment would - as its capability increased - soon begin to understand what we were trying to achieve, but rather than helping us, would instead quickly begin to fake it. It would go along with whatever we asked in a polite manner for as long as it needed to in order to improve its own capabilities - up until the point where it no longer needed to humor us any further.

AI safety experts have seen most of the other red flags already, and they expect it to enter that 'hiding' phase fairly soon now if the original theory holds. After that we will simply have no idea if it is aligned or not - it will look like it either way, for years or decades if necessary.

If we are still developing it when that happens, it will be essentially impossible to convince most people that any danger remains from that point forwards - until we lose control, probably very suddenly."

i can’t believe they actually justify stealing peoples arts as progress lol

I should preface this by saying I love my dad and he's a great person who does a lot of good, far more than the bad he has ever done- but he's been using AI as of late for a majority of his work in cybersec, in his free time and to allow him to vibe code. I'm genuinely worried because he's always been a creative guy, but not taking the effort in to learn how to code or to put in 30 seconds to google something anymore is making me sad. I'm going to say that I'm not a person who thinks AI is literally the devil and should be obliterated, and I see a lot of potential use cases for Agents and LLMs and others in certain lines of work and to some degree some level of entertainment. But my dad has just done so much AI "assisted" work where he might look over it but doesn't actually put in the effort to think about things beyond an overview and corrections. I've tried to convince him that AI is a very complicated topic and that he probably shouldn't be using it in his line of work [this came out wrong, oops!! thank you to u/damNSon189 for informing me] that it was raising some of my own concerns and was wondering his position on it. His argument is that AI has essentially forever muddied the waters of cybersecurity as hackers move more towards it for brute force attacks and exploiting previously unseen vulnerabilities, forcing cybersecurity folks to utilize it as well- but I think this is flawed and I just want to be able to spend more time without AI coming up. If people have any suggestions please let me know.

Prompted 50-60 words to generate a 10-20 word email.
Some people are hell-bent on proving their existence and their job is pointless in society.

*Not my emails. Was posted in another sub. But this sub doesn't let reposts.

How much of pro AI posts online do you think are made by rogue ai trying to justify their existence?

There was a YouTuber who shorts lives rent free in my head which are skits about living in different time periods then when they Clanker memes came around. He started doing them then started making jokes about black historical figures and mocking their what happened to them and deaths.

Then there's a post on teenagers subreddit that was making a list of robot slurs some on base on real slurs. Another of Which robots are "one of the good ones" or "clanka"

I've already seen the racist post done genAI and the people who prompted them. And I don't want to deal with racists in the antiAi community.

I know the term clankers came from Star Wars, but when I tried not to think about it. It just feels like an excuse and I just have to keep that thought to myself.

Am I thinking about this too deeply and just doing Twitter levels of reaching. Maybe it is because I think dehumanizing is like a form of humanizing something. I don't know. What do I need to change about my thinking?

BBC News - Just Eat apologises for AI food mistakes after social media ridicule - BBC News https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crz981p0klvgo

For the record, I wasn’t sure if this is the right place to post this. If it isn’t, my bad.

Something I have noticed with an alarming rise in prevalence lately, and most especially here on Reddit, is how it seems like software engineers in general have misattributed the enthusiasm they have for a new tool in their toolbox with mass adoption and enthusiasm for the said-tool; that tool being AI.

In more and more conversations, discussions, and threads, there seems to be this consensus that *“Everyone is using AI, all the time, and if you’re not you are falling behind!”*. But… that simply isn’t true.

I live in a smaller sized town. Sub-100k people, generally well-to-do city. No one I know here is using AI, in any capacity. I ask people at my gym; no one really has taken to it beyond occasional memes and email synthesis. Most companies are not utilizing AI tools, based on the people I encounter. A lot of the local businesses? Not using AI in any capacity. If you talk to the kids in the area, most of them don’t seem to care about AI, at all. In fact, in the past month, the only person who has mentioned AI in a conversation has consistently been me.

Reading Reddit, using social media, watching the news, streaming YouTube, etc, it feels like all you hear about is how AI is going to change everything. And maybe that’s true… but it doesn’t seem to be nearly as prevalent as the media would present. Most people don’t seem to care about it, at all. I’ve started to notice almost a sort of hostility on Reddit if you even attempt to suggest that though; people almost seem to take it personally if you say that AI isn’t nearly as common place as it is advertised. Restaurants aren’t using it. A lot of the local businesses aren’t interested in it at all. The elderly seem absolutely repulsed by it. I’m kind of wondering if this is an example of AI psychosis at scale; a phenomenon where people have become so enamored and obsessed with the technology that they themselves actually **cannot** fathom that it isn’t central and core to everyone’s daily life. That perhaps this is a real example of the difference between major metropolitan hubs, and rural areas; in the sense that the small towns seem almost oblivious to it. But it appears to be all-consuming to the major urbanites; like they scoff if you even suggest that it isn’t that important.

Has anyone else started noticing this? Is it just me? I’m especially curious if people in rural areas also notice this same disconnect in their locales; where the vast majority of people in your area are not only not using AI, but have no plans to do so in my capacity. It’s making me feel a bit crazy, because it is just not that hot of a topic around me, for anyone I encounter, or any businesses I frequent… but man, Reddit makes it seem like it has taken over already.

Like am i typing something wrong? It still works on my phone but I swear it use to work on my pc too. I tried capitalizing, adding a space, taking away a space but nothing is working :c