This is true about not just health, but literally everything. That's one reason AI is a big deal even when it's subhuman in performance. It empowers the individual to take care of themself (with as much "effort" as they'd like) rather than relying on another human.
Some examples:
- your health.
- your home.
- your children's education.
- your car.
- your finances.
- your (and your family's) safety.
- your elderly parents' welfare.
Remember when the new "personal computer" was the big-deal that was going to express your goals and act for your welfare? Yet today they're mainly spying on you and trying to dictate what you see and think.
The same corrupting forces will come for "personal AI", which is a political problem one can't passively delegate.
Rather than inventing a strawman to nitpick its word-choice and priorities [0], how about you engage with the substance instead? Here, I'll help:
"It is likely that personal 'AI'/LLM systems will end up arranged to favor other humans over their supposed owners/users." — Agree or disagree?
We've already seen that misalignment happen with consumer OSes, web-browser and ads, telemetry in cars, and a raft of copyright/DMCA stuff, all of which you've probably seen on HN before.
What makes you believe personal "AI" will escape the same influences?
> just like I think it’s completely ridiculous in the extreme to suggest that personal computers [...] represent a net negative
Usually when someone says a phrase like "your computer is mostly for spying on you" or "inkjet printers are demonic tools to harvest human suffering", most readers will understand those statements to be hyperbole, a rehtorical exaggeration to make a point... Not something literal to become angry about.
also, pretty funny that you think I'm angry about some rando's hysteria on HN lol