It’s wild that OP would think these two things are equivalent.
Pronouns are a thing that harms nobody, and the people frothing at the mouth are going out of their way to hurt people who did nothing wrong.
AI (in its most common meaning at this time in pop culture) at the minimum is wasting electricity (and it’s associated climate impact), and has the potential to totally decimate the job market and usher in an era of inequality that we haven’t seen for hundreds of years, while simultaneously stealing from artists. The people frothing at the mouth aren’t hurting anyone.
To use a bit of hyperbole, it’s kinda like if you said:
Some of y’all see “white power” and freak out without processing anything that’s being said, like a conservative who sees a mixed race couple.
Like pretty clearly people have a good reason for freaking out when they see that, and the other side of the equation are just bad people.
It was definitely in agreement. There are way better uses for our resources, people, and talent than on things like AI. That’s not to say that no one should have a tech job in AI, but the overwhelming push to expand and adopt it is insane.
This feels like a hasty generalization. For example, if one is experiencing gender dysphoria, we could assume that misgendering them with their undesired pronouns would cause them psychological distress [1] — ie harm.
Gender dysphoria (GD) is the distress a person experiences due to inconsistency between their gender identity—their personal sense of their own gender—and their sex assigned at birth.
How so? It wasn’t my intent to misrepresent your words. That being said, I do apologize if I’ve accidentally (and potentially carelessly) misinterpreted what you said. I’ll gladly fix my comment if you help me understand where my interpretation went wrong 😊
It’s wild that OP would think these two things are equivalent.
Pronouns are a thing that harms nobody, and the people frothing at the mouth are going out of their way to hurt people who did nothing wrong.
AI (in its most common meaning at this time in pop culture) at the minimum is wasting electricity (and it’s associated climate impact), and has the potential to totally decimate the job market and usher in an era of inequality that we haven’t seen for hundreds of years, while simultaneously stealing from artists. The people frothing at the mouth aren’t hurting anyone.
To use a bit of hyperbole, it’s kinda like if you said:
Like pretty clearly people have a good reason for freaking out when they see that, and the other side of the equation are just bad people.
Yes, it’s totally okay starve millions of homes of water and jack up their utility bills to be able to summarize articles and write emails. (/s)
I can’t tell if you’re agreeing or disagreeing with me
Because you wrote your reply like a criticism, but the content seem to agree with what I wrote
It was definitely in agreement. There are way better uses for our resources, people, and talent than on things like AI. That’s not to say that no one should have a tech job in AI, but the overwhelming push to expand and adopt it is insane.
Ah, that false quote is beautiful. It’s like watching an effortless right hook delivered squarely onto the jaw of whoever Rocky Balboa is fighting.
the OOP is a joke. They didn’t specify if that reaction is bad in that case
This feels like a hasty generalization. For example, if one is experiencing gender dysphoria, we could assume that misgendering them with their undesired pronouns would cause them psychological distress [1] — ie harm.
References
That is a willful misinterpretation of what I wrote.
How so? It wasn’t my intent to misrepresent your words. That being said, I do apologize if I’ve accidentally (and potentially carelessly) misinterpreted what you said. I’ll gladly fix my comment if you help me understand where my interpretation went wrong 😊