i think most people here conflate ai with data centers. datat centers exist with out ai and you can use ai without data centers. local ai fills a lot of needs and in the next two years there will be more home hardware to run it. nvidia just announced a new consumer chip , coming out later this year, to run models at home.
in my eyes, the bubble has always been paying a company to use their ai. sure it has places for science and medicine but most of us dont use it for that.
so AI is a tool, how its used or implemented is the problem.
Did you read the whole thing? It’s about a lot more, such as corporate control, economic hardship, and alienation. It’s not a long read and you don’t have to care or agree with the author, but this is a disservice to their post.
This blog post is a wandering train of thought on the topic of what tools are and why it matters to be even slightly more mature in how we think about them.
That’s the second sentence, and it’s fairly clear that the author means to start the discussion of the titular topic, not to conclusively explore every ail of AI. Of which there are many, yet enumerated.
Some people call this “food for thought”; I would agree.
I really want to link this article here as a counterpoint - why “AI is just a tool” as a stance doesn’t quite cut it as far as well-founded opinions go: https://www.frank.computer/blog/2025/05/just-a-tool.html
i think most people here conflate ai with data centers. datat centers exist with out ai and you can use ai without data centers. local ai fills a lot of needs and in the next two years there will be more home hardware to run it. nvidia just announced a new consumer chip , coming out later this year, to run models at home.
in my eyes, the bubble has always been paying a company to use their ai. sure it has places for science and medicine but most of us dont use it for that.
so AI is a tool, how its used or implemented is the problem.
That was unnecessarily wordy to express only two complaints:
AI causes environmental damage and AI was created by scraping content that the AI companies didn’t own.
Did you read the whole thing? It’s about a lot more, such as corporate control, economic hardship, and alienation. It’s not a long read and you don’t have to care or agree with the author, but this is a disservice to their post.
That’s the second sentence, and it’s fairly clear that the author means to start the discussion of the titular topic, not to conclusively explore every ail of AI. Of which there are many, yet enumerated.
Some people call this “food for thought”; I would agree.
You can have a wandering train of thought without writing 2500 words repeating the same two ideas over and over and over.
He’s not wrong.