AI has failed to win people's trust. Its makers? less trusted

euronews.com

29 points·billybuckwheat··6 comments

The usage graphs indicate trust doesn't matter all that much. Nothing has been adopted by all of the software development industry faster or more thoroughly, except maybe git.

I'm also highly suspicious of the motivations of Amodei and Altman, and consider them a bigger risk than AI itself (or, rather, I think it's probably riskier having them in charge of the leading AI companies than someone else), but I still pay them every month.

I mean AI usage was a.) forced on people b.) replaced buttons people happily used it. Like tokenmaxxing, you get more usage when you punish people for not producing slop. And you get more usage when one has to go out of their way to not use it.

And that makes people distrust ai and companies more.

“Move fast and break things” seems like a sound business strategy until people start waking up and wonder why everything is broken. For a similar example, see “Meta” and the legal trouble they are in for harming children and teens.

They don't need to win people's trust. Why do they? Petroleum companies are universally hated and they fuel the whole society. Politicians are the least trusted professionals and they literally rule the countries.

The point of AI is not "to win people's trust". Its purpose is to keep people's brain busy (just like social media) so that people do not start to look around and think.

This seems to be one of the cases where what people say in a survey and what they do are two very distinct things.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com