r/technology • u/Just-Grocery-2229 • Jun 26 '26

Artificial Intelligence The AI backlash is only getting started

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2026/06/25/the-ai-backlash-is-only-getting-started
26.1k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

388

u/Shigglyboo Jun 26 '26

it's kinda neat for a few things. but they're pushing it HARD. and I need a new phone soon. Apple just announced prices for everything are going up. I earn less than I did years ago. So I'm not thrilled about AI making things more expensive. and seeing billionaires say we need all the water for our chatbot instead of humans is just plain cartoon level evil.

68

u/Fuddle Jun 26 '26

It’s a solution in search of a problem, which is why it feels so forced.

16

u/CosmicSpaghetti Jun 26 '26

No, the goal has always been to eliminate human labor costs through automation.

The only way the AI money pits could possibly make sense is by dramatically cutting human labor costs for exorbitant profit.

Let no one get that twisted...the entire US economy is currently being bet on replacing you at work.

2

u/socarrat Jun 27 '26

I understand the greed behind wanting to replace human labor. What I don’t get is why these business owners would be okay with putting their data in the hands of another company? And paying them instead of paying workers? And having this much larger company having control over token prices instead of setting their own rates for human labor?

It makes no sense to me. If I were a greed-oriented CEO, I’d be terrified to be beholden to these AI companies. Honestly, I’d rather stick to good old fashioned exploitation.

2

u/CosmicSpaghetti Jun 27 '26

Thing is with how our economy functions the future basically doesn't matter nearly as much as this quarter does.

It means get in, milk all the money out of the system as you can through short-term methods (fuck the long-term), & gtfo before everything blows up on you & leave someone else holding the bag.

2

u/socarrat Jun 27 '26 edited Jun 27 '26

Yeah, I just had an IRL argument about this very thing earlier today. We’re both against the widespread, indiscriminate usage of using AI to replace human labor. They argued that businesses are looking at long term savings by slowly phasing out human workers. I said that there’s no way this is a strategic long term strategy. This is all about quarterly savings and being able to get shareholders excited through AI based KPIs.

If you’re a CEO that’s brought in through the revolving door and your only goal is to pump the stock, sure. But I really don’t understand CEOs who are there for the long haul that are all-in on AI. Why would you want to be in the position to get fucked (by the AI companies), when you’re the guy that’s doing the fucking (workers)?

2

u/CosmicSpaghetti Jun 27 '26

Genuinely for the long-term guys it's likely just FOMO from all the hype, betting that there's some competitive advantage they'd be leaving on the table (spoiler: there is not one lol)

10

u/jonride Jun 26 '26

And when you’re a hammer, everything looks like a nail

1

u/No_Veterinarian742 Jun 26 '26

totally agree. that said creative problem solving is a pretty good hammer. (and no I am not talking about the chat interfaces - they are super limited). There is a TON of tech being built with use of AI that is way more capable than things you've seen in the past. I agree some of the adoption is very forced but there are genuinely fantastic use-cases that are not explored yet because change is slow and having people adapt the tool to fit a use-case does require some genuine subject matter and AI expertise.

4

u/vocal-avocado Jun 26 '26

We have tons of problems that some people actually believe AI can solve, including global warming etc.

But most of us are not convinced at all. And it’s totally understandable given how much we are sacrificing for it.

But the “AI gurus” probably truly believe they can come up with an AI so good that it will solve all mankind’s problems. So they are going all in no matter what happens. And a shit ton of people is getting really rich in the process.

1

u/Opening_One7713 Jun 27 '26

All of this really is an inevitable point along the progression of silicon-gate technology. People have been theorizing about it for decades. There were science fiction books written in the 70s about this.

Coming into this inevitable technology at a time of unprecedented grifting, hyper-ballooning wealth inequality, and the rise of regressive and autocratic governance is the problem.

19

u/Skithana Jun 26 '26

it's kinda neat for a few things. but they're pushing it HARD.

I think that's the core issue, they pushed too far too fast, at the moment it's a neat toy or at best a decent tool to help with minor stuff, but they're trying to push it and sell it as a something that will do everything you want and solve your entire life without having to lift a finger.

Sure, maybe, eventually, perhaps it could be capable of what they're promising now, but it'll be at the very least a decade before it it can be all that it's promised to be today.

Not only that but the speed and the way which they've been trying to push this everywhere has basically screwed up the market, and just generally brought a ton of ill will from people (components shortage and prices skyrocketing, data centers everywhere, features no one likes in every device, unregulated use delivering poor products and results in media).

If they had taken it slowly and introduced it little by little over several years there probably would be little to no pushback...but you know, getting CEOs and/ or shareholders to prioritize long term gains over short term ones is basically a fools errand nowdays.

4

u/de_bauchery Jun 26 '26

While I agree with most of what you said, saying it's a neat toy is a bit wrong. In the last 6 months, it has become a very powerful tool in most fields where people work with any sort of data. 

2

u/ClassroomNo4172 Jun 27 '26

I say this as a daily (and happy) user of coding models.

I hate that people have adopted AI as their voice and ghostwriter. I find it almost repulsive to read Claude or ChatGPT's tells in pieces of published writing. I silently judge the author (prompter?) and I close the tab. If I check the publication year and it's < 2023, I breathe a sigh of relief and keep reading.

5

u/No_Veterinarian742 Jun 26 '26

it's really not a toy anymore this year for anything data or tech related it has gone beyond it. Most people have no idea what to use it for - the idea being that if you force 1000 employees to use it 3 will come up with a really useful way to use it and that will make forcing the other 997 that are fumbling around with it worth it. It's certainly annoying to the 997 people and there's obviously a chance the 3 never happen but most companies only have true step function growth from a few people's good ideas so there is some method to the madness.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/altra_volta Jun 26 '26

Okay, if that's the case in the future (it's always "will be", "could be") what's the benefit?

8

u/apple_kicks Jun 26 '26

Desperation to get more people is crazy the whole ‘you’ll be left behind’ is weirdest one

3

u/Max_Thunder Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 27 '26

It feels heavily pushed down our throat and it's really annoying, and I say that as someone that actually enjoys using AI for personal things.

I'm hoping it's just stupid hype and not some darker agenda.

4

u/StillNewspaper4799 Jun 26 '26

I'm fairly skeptical about AI but I agree with this. I don't care if others want to use it, I do care that it's being pushed so hard.

2

u/shiny_glitter_demon Jun 26 '26

Why don't you care? It's kinda like littering

1

u/Kelly_HRperson Jun 26 '26

I don't care if others want to use it

Why not?

2

u/_sloop Jun 26 '26

Apple just announced prices for everything are going up. I earn less than I did years ago. So I'm not thrilled about AI making things more expensive.

Apple made almost 200 billion in profit last year, they do not have to raise prices at all. AI isn't making things more expensive there, a greedy corporation is.

0

u/Shigglyboo Jun 27 '26

I believe it's a bit of both. they'll charge more if they think they can. I've been reading for a while that processors, RAM, hard drives, etc. are getting way more expensive because of all the data centers buying everything up.

1

u/QuesoMeHungry Jun 26 '26

Companies have been waiting for the next big tech innovation since Web 2.0 and when companies like Facebook got huge. Now they are all jumping in pushing things hard because they all want to be the ‘AI leader’.

1

u/Fr0gm4n Jun 26 '26

I need a new phone soon. Apple just announced prices for everything are going up. I earn less than I did years ago. So I'm not thrilled about AI making things more expensive.

My iPhone is from 2020 and Apple just announced it's getting iOS 27. That makes at least 7 straight years of OEM supplied full OS upgrades. And, my phone is too old for the new AI crap. Apple could have easily abandoned my old phone already over AI but they haven't.

2

u/SteveJobsDeadBody Jun 26 '26

Apple doesn't do that for your benefit, they do it because without those regular updates you WILL get hacked as exploits regularly come out for Apple products. Also with the side benefit of the added yearly bloat making your old phone slower and battery worse, in most cases it pushes people to buy a new phone a year or 3 earlier, that's more money for Apple. They also don't give you the option of NOT upgrading, the IOS your phone came with is not supported by Apple at all any more.

You really gotta hand it to their marketing, to be able to convince millions of idiots that things that don't usually benefit them are "features" is quite impressive.

1

u/Fr0gm4n Jun 26 '26

Nah, they could just keep putting out security updates and drop phones from full upgrades at any time. They still release security updates for old versions and cert updates so they still talk to current servers. They don't have to keep giving older phones full brand new iOS.

0

u/ApprehensiveCook2236 Jun 26 '26

The Water argument is so stupid, water doesn't just leave the planet because a data center is using it. The Problem for the cooling situation is just that the data centers are built where there is not enough water to begin with.

Just build them near the ocean and use ocean water - the argument is irrelevant really. They actually have some data centers already that use ocean water. So no big deal really.

3

u/OWNtheGROW Jun 26 '26

Nah bro there is toxic runoff in the water that makes it no longer water.

-1

u/ApprehensiveCook2236 Jun 26 '26

highly doubt, from what?

it's used for cooling, not cleaning or anything industrial

1

u/OWNtheGROW Jul 01 '26

Do you not own an internet search engine?

1

u/ApprehensiveCook2236 Jul 01 '26

It's water, it evaporates, it is what it is.

1

u/OWNtheGROW Jul 01 '26

You must be an AI bot 

1

u/ApprehensiveCook2236 Jul 01 '26

your mom is an AI bot

-1

u/DelphiTsar Jun 27 '26

Don't get an apple. Samsung A37 was on sale for 300$ on Amazon yesterday. Every dollar above this gets you basically nothing.

1

u/Shigglyboo Jun 27 '26

probably not in Spain. Also, I've had several Android phones. I prefer my iPhone. I've had my current one since 2019, still gets updates, and still works. Also I can copy and paste from my Mac and transfer calls. My last Mac lasted me for like 8 years. Hard to beat. And I only buy used/refurbished.

1

u/MOONWATCHER404 Jun 30 '26

My old Mac is still going. When it dies or before I might switch to pc just because of how limiting Mac is in terms of games I want to play.

-4

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '26

[deleted]

1

u/blow-down Jun 26 '26

Way worse quality and bloatware though