That’s not the only, or the main reason why people are negative about AI, currently. (People do make fun of it, but the anger fuels from MANY different angles).
This is a rhetoric/fallacy argument that he’s using, which, alone, shows his bias.
So until there’s an ethical, nuanced take on AI use from him, it’s probably safe to assume he’s drank the AI kool-aid. That, or he’s playing politics and trying not to alienate or make waves with certain people. And even if he isn’t, the simple status-quo “it’s just a tool” is so wildly irresponsible of a statement, that it’s effectively pro-AI.
An honest neutral AI take would address all major current concerns with it, not simply “does it work?” Wild.
Otherwise, he’s just the scientist working on the Nazi gas chambers going “yeah it works”. Like, bro, that’s not the only problem here; address the fucking elephant in the room!
Not addressing the elephant in the room IS the bias.
Everybody knows AI can be useful. Duh.
That’s not the only, or the main reason why people are negative about AI, currently. (People do make fun of it, but the anger fuels from MANY different angles).
This is a rhetoric/fallacy argument that he’s using, which, alone, shows his bias.
So until there’s an ethical, nuanced take on AI use from him, it’s probably safe to assume he’s drank the AI kool-aid. That, or he’s playing politics and trying not to alienate or make waves with certain people. And even if he isn’t, the simple status-quo “it’s just a tool” is so wildly irresponsible of a statement, that it’s effectively pro-AI.
An honest neutral AI take would address all major current concerns with it, not simply “does it work?” Wild.
Otherwise, he’s just the scientist working on the Nazi gas chambers going “yeah it works”. Like, bro, that’s not the only problem here; address the fucking elephant in the room!
Not addressing the elephant in the room IS the bias.