Hacker News Reader

Comment by freeone3000 | Hacker News Reader

> concrete interfaces with specific predefined vocabularies and a local-first UX

An app? We don’t even need to put AI in it, turns out you can book flights without one.

I see the AI push as turnkey Wall E future.

Tech won't freeze in place exactly where it's at today even if some people want that, and even if in some cases it actually would make sense. And.. if you advocate for this I think you risk losing credibility. Especially amongst technologists it's better to think critically about structural problems with the trends and trajectories. AI is fine, change is fine.. the question now is really more like why and what for and in the interest of whom. To the extent models work locally, we'll be empowered in the end.

Similarly, software eating the world was actually pretty much fine, but SaaS is/was a bit of a trap. And anyone who thought SaaS was bad should be terrified about the moats and platform lock-in that billion dollar models might mean, the enshittification that inevitably follows market dominance, etc.

Honestly we kinda need a new Stallman for the brave new world, someone who is relentlessly beating the drum on this stuff even if they come across as anticorporate and extreme. An extremist might get traction, but a call to preserve things as they are probably cannot / should not.

>And.. if you advocate for this I think you risk losing credibility

It's a shame if new interface = credible by default. Look at all the car manufacturers (well some, probably not enough) finally after many years conceding the change to touch interfaces "because new" was a terrible idea, when the right old tool for the job was simply better...and obvious to end-users very quickly.

Again in that case the newness of different tech isn’t actually the real problem and feels like the wrong critique. What’s problematic is trajectory and intent with things like planned obsolescence, subscriptions, ongoing costs in repairs after initial sale. I’d say that a new interface is barely even an issue compared with that.. although fwiw, yes, I prefer buttons rather than touch screens.

>the newness of different tech isn’t actually the real problem and feels like the wrong critique

I'm not equating new = bad. I'm saying new = good is wrong. And based on your last sentence, you do think car manufacturers all switching over to all touch controls was a problem. Almost everyone prefers buttons to touch screens, that's my point. The better more popular option was rejected because of a false premise, or false belief.

If you believe in this to that extent, why can’t you be the “new Stallman”?

It's not about what I believe, it's about what we already know. Computing is old enough now that you don't need to be some kind of mad prophet to know things about the future, because you can just look at how things have played out already.

More to the point though.. at the beginning at least, Stallman was a respected hacker and not just some random person pushing politics on a community he was barely involved with. It's gotta be that way I think, anyone who's not a respected AI/ML insider won't get far

If you are a random outsider… then how do you know there is the room and potential for such an individual?

I remember you now, and I would block you if I could. On the off chance you’re not doing this on purpose, read this please: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning

Regardless of whatever you believe, you still need to write the actual claim/argument down?

You don’t have any more credibility than most other HN users… so just stating insinuations as if they were self evident doesn’t even make sense.

I am worried about a more modest enshittification. I am already starting to encounter models that are just plain out of date in non obvious ways. It has the same feeling as trying to remember how to express someone on how to troubleshoot windows over the phone for two versions ago (e.g.: in vista this was slightly different).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com