Big Tech's Frantic Race to Quell the Growing Backlash to AI | Hacker News Reader

Big Tech's Frantic Race to Quell the Growing Backlash to AI

wsj.com

26 pointsnewsomix9xl17 comments

> Earlier in August, Meta Platforms announced a $1 billion “Future Is For Everyone” fund to pour money into the communities where Meta has data centers. In an interview, Lindsay Elin, a vice president of public policy at Meta, said the company’s investment from the $1 billion fund will look different in each community. She said Meta plans to sit down with school superintendents and police chiefs to see what might be financially beneficial to them.

Like building a hyped up school for the underprivileged with lots of fanfare and promise but then suddenly shutting it down leaving 500 low income students stranded because you want to pivot your philanthropy towards AI and biotech?

> Mark Zuckerberg and Dr. Priscilla Chan closed The Primary School—a tuition-free institution serving low-income families in East Palo Alto in 2026. CZI cited shifting its philanthropic focus away from local social and educational programs toward biomedical science and artificial intelligence.

https://futurism.com/future-society/mark-zuckerberg-wife-shu...

I thought you were referencing Scott's Tots from The Office. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0N2ZxQJYTw

They are using the usual techniques. All successful negative things always have a claim to virtue.

Highlight the positives, hide the negatives.

How about putting the brakes on LLMs and prioritizing other types of AI.

When I think of AI, my mind goes towards automated Metro trains that do a great job of driving on fixed routes. On the other hand, it's obvious that the train can't do something like generate dinner recipies.

That would benefit the general public with no hope of high margins. VCs don't care about that stuff.

After social media, streaming, crypto, what have you, too many of us have come to understand that advances in technology in this era are going to be used against us more than for us.

An insightful comment but not because I agree but because you raise the question "who benefits?" And that is a great question.

https://archive.is/T6qQ5

- if everyone stopped using LLMs and went back to coding by hand, guess what happens

- claude subscriptions stop selling

- open AI subscriptions stop selling

- both companies crash overnight

- finances are pulled back from all data center projects

- because obviously nobody wants to build something with no demand

- but 99% of HN itself is filled with "I have stopped coding manually" people

- and these are the same guys that ll on a different thread and cry about climate change

this

Is it possible climate change started in the industrial revolution, decades ago and all current action won't change anything?

There's this assumption of human efficacy in climate arguments, like "if we all just recycled and drove electric cars..." Which could be too little, too late...

data centers are a major issue though if they are used for cloud services it would still be justifiable but setting up football sized fields for running just AI (honestly something everyone can live without)

You miss my point. If climate change is real (and I think it is) but we can't fix it why not enjoy AI and gas cars and air conditioning anyway?

See my point?

I find the headline offensive.

AI is objectively a good thing.

The backlash is against big tech’s plan to use AI for the enshitification of everything from the economy to the arts to the environment.

> AI is objectively a good thing.

No, you subjectively think it's a good thing.

> AI is objectively a good thing.

Honestly could not disagree more, because

> to use AI for the enshitification of everything from the economy to the arts to the environment

"Objectively good" technology would not enable the absolute abuses we are seeing, that you even highlight. You contradict your own statement.

Contact the WSJ author and let him know

Reply on news.ycombinator.com