Hacker News Reader

Comment by camgunz | Hacker News Reader

This list of things not to use AI for is so quaint. There's a story on the front page right now from The Atlantic: "Film students who can no longer sit through films". But why? Aren't they using social media, YouTube, Netflix, etc responsibly? Surely they know the risks, and surely people will be just as responsible with AI, even given the enormous economic and professional pressures to be irresponsible.

View on HN

  > Surely they know the risks, and surely people will be just as responsible with AI

I can't imagine even half of students can understand the short and long term risk of using social media and AI intensively. At least I couldn't when I was a student.

What is the lesson in the anecdote about film students? To me, it’s that people like the idea of studying film more than they like actually studying film. I fail to see the connection to social media or AI.

AI performs strictly in the Platonic world, as is the social media experience. As is the film student.

Yikes, that was too real

Social media's rotted their attention span

> Film students who can no longer sit through films

Everyone loves watching films until they get a curriculum with 100 of them along with a massive reading list, essays, and exams coming up.

I learned that when I decided to become a competitive Warcraft 3 player.

Apparently, my competitiveness lasts for a month.

Gaming is much more fun when you get to decide when to quit and how to play.

> surely people will be just as responsible with AI

That's exactly what worries us.

We lose something when we give up horses for cars.

Have too many of us outsourced our ability to raise horses for transport?

Surely you're capable of walking all day without break?

It's a funnily relevant parallel you're making, because designing everything around the car has absolutely been one of the biggest catastrophes of 2nd half of the 20th century. Much like "AI" in the past couple years, the personal automobile is a useful tool but making anything and everything subservient towards its use has had catastrophic consequences.

It is political. Designing everything around cars benefits the class of people called "Car Owners". Not so much people who don't have the money or desire to buy a car.

Although, congestion pricing is a good counter-example. On the surface it looks like it is designed to benefit users of public transportation. But turns out it also benefits car-owners, because it reduces traffic jams and lets you get to your destination with your own car faster.

>Designing everything around cars benefits the class of people called "Car Owners".

Designing everything around cars hurts everyone including car owners. Having no option but to drive everywhere just sucks.

But the AD for my Cadillac says I’m an incredible person for driving it, that cant be wrong.

No, it benefits car manufacturers and sellers, and mechanics and gas stations.

Network/snowball effects are not all good. If local businesses close because everybody drives to WalMart to save a buck, now other people around those local businesses also have to buy a car.

I remember a couple of decades ago when some bus companies in the UK were privatized, and they cut out the "unprofitable" feeder routes.

Guess what? More people in cars, and those people didn't just park and take the bus when they got to the main route, either.

>No, it benefits car manufacturers and sellers, and mechanics and gas stations.

Everybody thinks they're customers when they buy a car, but they're really the product. These industries, and others, are the real customers

> Everybody thinks they're customers

So much so that my comment attracted downvotes.

C'est la vie.

But having a car is kind of bad. Maybe you remember when everyone smoked, and there was stuff for smokers everywhere. Sure that made it easier for smokers, but ultimately that wasn't good for them (nor anyone around them).

I am actually, we haven't owned car for years. We also rarely watch TV and eschew social media, so I can still pay attention and analyze things.

But this makes me super weird! This is the whole point of social media bans for kids: if you make it optional, it'll still be prevalent and people making healthy choices will be social weirdos. Healthy paths need to be free and accessible, and things need to be built around them (eg don't assume everyone has a smartphone, etc)

Perhaps the films were weren't worth sitting through?

Recently a side discussion came up - people in the Western world are "rediscovering" fermented, and pickled, foods that are still in heavy use in Asian cultures.

Fermentation was a great way to /preserve/ food, but it can be a bit hit and miss. Pickling can be outright dangerous if not done correctly - botulism is a constant risk.

When canning of foods came along it was a massive game changer, many foods became shelf stable for months or years.

Fermentation and pickling was dropped almost universally (in the West).

> Fermentation and pickling was dropped almost universally (in the West).

What are you talking about? What do you think pickles are? Or sauerkraut, for that matter?

Or cheese or beer?

They're making a (strong) comeback (although sauerkraut is still seen as "ethnic" in the anglosphere), sure

How often have you made them yourself, how often does your friend at work make them (if ever?)

Edit: I'm sure you can add to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46733306

Pickles are in McDonald's burgers which is probably as mainstream across the globe as you can get.

Remind me how long after canning food became widespread in the USA was McDonalds created?

Was it 50 years? 100?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com