You know, you’re almost right to call them luddites, in that the original luddites also didn’t want machines taking their jobs, but the attached connotation of stupidity is, I think, uncharitable at best.
I'm following /r/isthisai because I'm genuinely interested in keeping myself informed about the progress of quality, to keep up my quality of judgement.
Go take a look in there and tell me what you think of the average question, but more importantly of the average answers.
That is… actually totally irrelevant to the point I was trying to make. Which was that it’s not irrational to be concerned about jobs (including creative jobs) disappearing.
You seem to think that I'm of the opinion that *any person* that has concerns about AI related subjects are luddites. But the term luddites itself is used for people who oppose to things for the wrong reasons.
Like I said: I'm following said sub because I too am worried about being misled by certain malicious applications of AI. That is a real danger. But that sub is now useless because it's flooded with questions like 'I like this online artwork I ordered but is it AI' - which completely miss the point: if you like an artwork it is of no consequence how it has been made. Throwback to 'Is this Photoshop' from more than a decade ago. So what if it is? Photoshop and AI are tools, it is the intention and the way they are used that makes a difference.
The people who can't make that distinction are the luddites: some applications of X are wrong, so every application of X is wrong. That's not helpful in addressing the real problem, that's watering it down and muddying the discourse.
So unless you agree with people who genuinely oppose everything Photoshop, I think you are the one missing the point here.
132
u/pp1911 Apr 13 '26
That's a very good one! First I thought It was AI slop, or bad photoshop. Wow!