Instead of futilely demanding technology to go away, it would be better to focus on organizing together for better outcomes. https://opcraft.co/writing/2026/04/getting-the-good-ai-futur...
I would agree that there is a political project happening in the AI space (and that it predates modern AI); I think it's worth giving that political project a distinct name, rather than conflating a term already widely used and understood very differently by normal people.
No. Obviously, what you do on your PC is inconsequential to the rest of society. But despite this, AI and its consequences in big tech have become so thoroughly linked because the entities that develop and profit off of AI use are so big and influential over the rest of us. The hobbyist space isn't what people even think about.
This entire brain dump of a blog post could be summed up in one famous sentence: Man is a political animal.
I never understand people who seem to have a need to grasp at such poorly written blogs for an understanding of today's affairs. Humans have really been remarkably consistent in their nature. The answer to your question has already been written, maybe even centuries ago by someone who thought about this a lot harder than you. Sometimes it feels like LLMs are so good simply because most people are far less interesting than they think they are. At some level humanity has been asking the same fundamental questions since the dawn of civilization. At a certain point what more does the average person have to say that we haven't already heard before?
> Don't see the Mandelbrot set around much these days.
Was computing the mandlebrot set ever shown to be broadly and commercially useful in some way?
It's more like hating the Almquist shell, or UNIX utilities in general
In practice, for most of the population, "AI" is someone else's software. Maybe some dislike using it
But as the commencement speaker at Middle Tennessee State said, "Deal with it. Like I said, it's a tool."
The UNIX shell and utilities are out there, running on billions of computers. There's no going back
I chose to adapt. But many "software developers" will futilely keep demanding that the UNIX shell go away and be replaced by something else
Being angry at LLMs isn't hating math, it is hating slot machines and the human inclination to lose everything to them because the Gambler's Fallacy affects us all, unfortunately deeply.
I would agree there are sound regulations needed, but banning certain kinds of math is not it. (Your DRM example is particularly unfriendly to your point in this regard.)