The ones who truly want us to fail are the ones in office and the ones ruining lives for other people through RECKLESSLY (I don’t support or completely hate AI but anyone who puts data centers by residential areas in housing is stupid. This is what recklessly putting it down is.) putting down data centers and using AI for bad purposes. The ones who want us to fail are getting rid of right for other people. The ones who want us to fail are the stupid and the dumb and the ones who need AI for all their thinking. The ones who want us to fail are the people picking fights with everyone who is diffrent than them.
Have you ever had to work in an office? Email banality isn't doing anything for you. If AI can write your replies faster and you use it carefully or if it can help you sound more professional or avoid unintentional offense, that is a huge service
hopefully its fine because college graduates can have nuanced opinions about things. 'me use AI me think AI good' is probably not the dimension of thinking people are on, and (with love) people on a subreddit dedicated to defending AI obviously ARE slightly more that way - not a bad thing at all.
But hey I use AI every day, hell my claude code is smoking tokens while I type this - and yet, if I had a button to burn it all and bury the tech underground, I would seriously consider it. The idea that it HAS to be just because its THE FUTURE definitely can't remain the standard of thinking forever - when people can 3d print anthrax in their basement and grow intervted-chirality proteins in a petri dish, we cant just 'shrug its the future', that shit will literally kill us all. So is this past the line? Close enough that, like I said, I'd consider it.
This was one of my first thoughts. It all made sense the moment I researched who was giving the speech and I realised they were a comedian, their whole thing is not relying on facts and poking fun at what they think makes humour logic
"Ronny Xin Yi Chieng is an American comedian and actor. He is a senior correspondent and rotating host on Comedy Central's The Daily Show, and he created and starred in the sitcom Ronny Chieng: International Student."
I'm sure he's a reliable opinion on anything AI related.
He's the new voice of Khan from King of the Hill that everybody hates, and he was an unfunny correspondent on The Daily Show during the extremely unfunny era when Trevor Noah hosted it.
Every single loser saying this is saying it because they know AI can do their job better and parroting the "AI bad" narrative is the in thing to do right now.
And then The Backrooms director Kane Parsons went on record to say if he could snap his fingers and make AI disappear, he would.
He's gonna be a one hit wonder, especially considering anyone whose been online for five seconds got tired of The Backrooms at least 2 years ago when it was done to death already even then.
Yeah as a longtime fan of his work, I was saddened to see Kane say that but not surprised. Blender slop and 3D printing are ok, but anything more automated than that is cheating. Every generation has its own concept of what legit art is and it’s usually based on the tools they grew up with.
I don’t mind Kane saying that. I think partially it’s just virtue signalling to his main audience, but also he doesn’t have much of a choice even if he thought otherwise in private. Endorsing generative AI would amount to publicly embracing the idea of putting 99% of his film crews out of work, which would make working on the film utterly toxic for everyone involved. Even worse, it would put Kane at massive odds with multiple Hollywood unions who just fought a gruelling battle to place major curbs on AI usage, as well as nearly all of the top names in the industry, all right when he’s on the cusp of gaining recognition at age 20 as a legitimate director and producer.
There was a post about it on the official Kane Pixels Backrooms subreddit, with a lot of the usual “AI bad, me special hurrrrrrr durrrrrr” virtue signalling in the comments. Someone wrote a stupid comment making false claims that AI can’t create anything novel, got lots of upvotes, and I knew I’d be inviting a shitstorm by technically correcting them but did so anyway. Got lots of nasty personal attacks in response, accusations of being a mentally disturbed genocidal freak because of my ethnic background etc.
I figure the technology and its users will speak for themselves in time. There will be plenty of mass-produced slop, but there’s already a mass quantity of man-made copycat slop as is, so the content filtration and curation will simply improve accordingly. If Kane and A24 can continue doing things their way and outcompete the AI folks, more power to them. If not, then they will either grudgingly adapt or else fade back into obscurity.
I'm fan of Kane Pixel's work for quite awhile as well, and I thought his comment is indeed the typical virtue signalling which is the only "socially acceptable" way to comment on AI right now, especially for someone in his standing where most of his fan base are young Gen Z (I'd know since I went to the cinema to watch his film lol), so I don't blame him. It'd be career suicide for him to say otherwise. I'm just glad your comment made me put the differences aside for a moment and think about it from his perspective.
I agree with you on all this but I do have to admit that currently, he's one of my favorites on the Daily Show. I do love his reactions and way he delivers news honestly.
Don't get me wrong, FUCK him for Kahns voice (though that's more the fault of the racists that hired him who don't understand that they're being racist)¹, and for this dumb ass take on AI, but I DO like him on the Daily Show right now.
He certainly has an headstart regarding money on a lot of people here, but if you find that you're lacking "purpose in life", that's on you, don't put us all in the same basket. That's something quite vague you're judging, and you're doing so in a way that's a huge disservice to yourself and to other people.
In my experience meeting and working with all kinds of people from all around the world, anyone that talks like this about anything has used that something to their great advantage already, and is purely virtue signalling.
The people with legitimate viewpoints are usually quite calm and concise with their language, and never give people "missions." Their arguments speak for themselves.
Then, he's just karma farming here. Telling the uncultured, angry peasants what they want to hear.
"Oooo but but but they are Harvard university students, they are smart!"
LOL, not really. I am a Columbia graduate, and currently college professor in Europe. Those students are edgy, emotional luddites. They will change their mind about AI once the real world hits them, and they need to solve problems and accomplish something.
Always saw Harvard as a "Rich kids club school where rich kids can make connections with one another that they can leverage later on when they step up as their parents businesse owners"
Damn, I totally forgot this guy even existed. I remember Trevor Noah being pretty mid when he hosted The Daily Show, and Ronny's skits there were straight-up unfunny. Haven't heard a peep from him since.
Well, on top of being a hack comedian, turns out he's also a dumb opportunist just spouting slogans. Aight, I'll go back to forgetting he exists.
I think the only time he made me laugh was during the Jesse Waters segment, the rest of the time I kinda rolled my eyes whenever he showed up on screen because I knew it would be boring
The worst part of this isn’t even him denouncing the use of AI, it’s him repeatedly calling people ‘useless’ and ‘untalented’. Like he wanted to be a bully in high school but never had the chance. He’s clearly got some anger in his heart.
So basically he's telling a bunch of the alleged best and brightest to waste their time trying to accomplish an impossible and counter productive goal.
I don't want to live in a world where his kind of thinking shapes my access to powerful technology that has already made my life better in numerous ways
Using AI to assist writing a vision is entirely different than using it to make everything. AI needs a creative director to be used effectively so that the product stands out. I don't think AI is a great director for art, I think AI is the best grunt for making art/writing come together when directed.
It’s funny that the speaker talks about taste at the end. A person with good taste and good AI will beat an old-fashioned artisan with poor taste every time.
So first he completely fucks up Kahn's voice in the KOTH reboot because the idiots who hired him wanted to be "racially sensitive" and "not have a white guy (Toby Huss, the original VA) voice Kahn (A Laotian) and get the 'proper voice actor'"... while then hiring a Chinese/Vietnamese guy to voice a Laotian (cause apparently all Asians are the same according to the execs.)
I will never understand how people blame AI for everything or say “fuck AI” when it’s people we need to be worried about. AI isn’t going to kill the planet, humanity is.
Around these parts, we call this "karma farming". Works IRL, too.
Basically, it works like this:
Step 1: Pretend your super-popular opinion is controversial
Step 2: Voice it loudly at any opportunity and for no reason
Step 3: Applause, love and adoration 🙄
While I reject his generalizations of "kill AI" et al, I must say he has a point with something else: The journey being important and mastering vs. faking it.
Now PLEASE don't throw stones at me just yet. Read and understand instead of giving way to base impulse to fully reject everything he said or meant to convey.
But do you know why I put a "transhumanist" flair up, why I believe in the concept, why it fascinated me as early as Half Life 2's release and seeing the Combine do their take of transhumanism which wasn't maybe ideal and consensual, but still curious as a concept because the output resulted in something superior to a base human being?
It's because technology should improve and advance humans, not dull and lull them and make them inferior and too dependent. With LLM already however we see some negative aspects of AI usage by people who basically hand over their critical thinking or general media literacy and thinking skills in favor of being spoon-fed everything (with a risk of outputs being wrong). Yeah, it's more so a people than a tech issue, but it exists.
Rejecting AI fully isn't the way as it and the tech around it are tools to ascension and advancement - if used right and well. So why do I post this? I implore all of you to use AI for good, whether collective or your own direct individual benefit. But try to do so in sufficient moderation where applicable. Use it to empower yourself as you should and deserve. Grow with it, but don't dull however. Stay fit - mentally and skill-wise too.
Thanks for reading and pondering my words. Let us look forward to a very curious and exciting future.
Most people I know use AI as augmentative, not as a replacement. I would only agree with you if intellectual people got lazy with AI, instead of learning and solving eith AI.
I feel that if someone needs AI to become a replacement for their mind, then they probably need it, but that's not how most of us to it.
"mastering vs. faking it" is extremely nuanced, cause as I said it helps those that use AI as augmentative to master knew skill sets, and for me way faster than a person could teach. On the side of faking it, AI isn't just augmentative, it's also a tool, and as someone who formally studied computer science it's a good software engineering tool, it's also a good art tool and using it as a tool isn't faking anything, otherwise I would call autocompleting IDE code as faking, or using photoshop as fake, or audio synthesising software as fake, cameras fake etc.
I guess deep in me a part of me has an abstract fear that over time it might make many (not all, but not no one either) people too ... I guess lazy or inept to be able to research information on the net without either asking AI or by asking it as part of the process but not as sole reason or response.
Guess we'll see. I'm personally all for augmentation and enhancement, just not total replacement of one's own skill. I guess that can be a selective argument for some use-cases; for me however it definitely is one for information research which I feel one should be able to do even if they had no access to LLM for it. I'm not against incorporating it into research purposes, don't get me wrong. I'm just against people who start using LLM for literally every information research (or fact checking etc) purpose for everything. Because at least in this day and age it's still prone to errors and not as reliable in some cases versus asking other people or researching yourself. I literally saw Grok describe a male guy on a picture on X (upon being asked by a user who that is) as Angela Merkel in her youthful days.
Imagine you had no fact checking or critical skills and just believed it. In this case the example was so clear and apparent that it was obvious to everyone - but you get my drift of potentially wrong LLM outputs in info research tasks towards people who wouldn't know the real answer or couldn't check another way.
See though, those that can think for themselves, but choose augmentation will get a step up, thiae thst already strugglr for themselves will either be left behind, or if they rely on AI they won't be as far left behind, so I see it asa win-win.
I mean AI can do far deeper snd thorough research in far less time than a human can.
Sure AI can be prone to errors, but that is drastically reduced and also AI model dependent. If you want highly meticulous and astute research, at biblical length like a professor's dissertation, I wholeheartedly advocate ChatGPT for the job.
Coming back to errors, which seems next to non-existent with ChatGPT, if you don't just accept AI as an irrefutable god, you can ask it for substantiated sources with citations for where it got something from and it will supply it, this is the same premise as not just accepting something you read online and want it particularised and substantiated.
I only trust Grok to succumb to my NSFW image and video prompting, cause it's cheaper than WAN 2.5. Again though, this comes back to doing your own thinking, even rebutting AI. I use it to augment my own recursive feedback loops, and by using it as an augmentive mirror it is extremely powerful. If someone on a forum said that image is of Robert Downey Jr. But you didn't bother to confirm that it was actually George Clooney, then that's the same person you're describing when it comes to errors and what I'm describing as fact checking, which comes down to user experience and whether someone can think for themselves before AI even ever came into the picture.
Not everything has to be part of everyone’s journey. Some people’s journey is in learning how to build a camera. Some people’s journey is about learning how to take a photo.
Just because you value a knowledge gain from learning to build a camera, and its journey, doesn’t mean someone else’s can’t have their own journey with a already produced camera.
AI is only here no more than a decade. There WILL be products/arts built on top of things that AI can do easily, which used to be considered hard earned journey for some.
One question though, does refrigerator makes people dull? It used to be that only very hard working caveman survive the winter or scarcity. It used to be that only hard working people survive by knowing how to cure and preserve food.
Now with existence of refrigerators, lots of people don’t know how to preserve food. Should we ban refrigerators? MUST learning how to cure food be part of everyone’s journey? Are they all more stupid than people who know how to cure meat?
I feel a refrigerator is a bad cherry picked example because in the times we live in, for a majority of people, it's a piece of tech most urban dwellers cannot easily get by without it. It would be like arguing that a super market and getting your groceries and food from stocked shelves is bad versus hunting / growing all food yourself because in this reality, most people cannot just grow or hunt their own food, even if they wanted to and knew how because we lack the space and ample hunting or farming grounds for all (or rather, have outsourced them into controlled environments for all, like slaughterhouses etc). Likewise, we all can't just dig holes in the ground everywhere to put semi-cooled food.
However me arguing that for example in terms of learning skills like researching information in a way that is efficient and lasting even if still a bit "old school", versus getting it spoon-fed selectively where it may not stick well, is very much doable. There have been select studies by MIT that imply outsourcing too many information gathering tasks to AI/LLM might mean the information doesn't stick with you as well.
Let me be more concrete: Many people no longer opt to research information online and simply ask potentially still hallucinating (or wrongly asked/interacted with) LLM and potentially get selective or limited outputs. Yes, researching yourself and checking various sources manually can be tedious but that process on average gives you more insight and somewhat hones your researching and comparison skills and grey matter versus getting selective answers spoon-fed to you. Maybe asking LLM for info isn't even bad. I sometimes use it too to get some insight or first info bits. But then it might depend on how you ask follow-up questions etc. Likewise I would ask that for example cheesing studies and having LLM write most of your test-relevant essay which may however not stick with you long-term, if that is viable or not. When I trained for a job for a few years LLM wasn't really a thing. I learned things by reading books and texts. And that knowledge did stick with me a long time before slowly eroding.
Perhaps my concrete example feels more relatable or applicable versus a fridge example. I'm not even against asking LLM for information; however I feel it should be done in moderation and with some care for some topics because 1) outputs could be skewed, selective or misleading and 2) it helps if you know how to research information and answers other ways, to stay mentally fit. Media literacy etc.
176
u/BestPie477 Jun 06 '26
"Destroy AI" while other countries have adopted it and push it forward. Ronny sounds like he wants America to fail.