242 karma · joined June 24, 2025
This is a burden of proof inversion: historically new technology has not resulted in optimistic outcomes. Quality of life improvements were side effects of capital accruing. AI optimism is the naïve option that requires justification.
It's one thing to give Claude a narrow task with clear parameters, and another to watch errors or incorrect assumptions snowball as you have a more complex conversation or open-ended task.
What a great way to summarize LLM behaviour in 2026
This claim is enormous. I would instead argue that the movement lacked cohesiveness because it basically complained about too large a set of (correctly identified as interconnected) issues and lost momentum because the surface was too large.
That said, I agree w your point about a face being important. Even in software, where tech can speak for itself, we see this heavily: Torvalds, Matsumoto, van Rossum, Jobs,
Also who are these non-theoretical people who in this economy can afford to sit around but are suddenly economically motivated by gig economy offerings?
> "Dashers have a new way to earn on their own terms"
The classic meaning inversion of precariousness and lack of benefits as a virtue.
Nope.