Your statement is also why I fear this supposed promise that "AI will do all the work, society won't need jobs!". I don't think we're getting this post-work utopia that tecunocrats love to promise.

I didn't use it much growing up since they moved west when I was young. but it turns out that "y'all" is surprisingly nifty: a gender neutral, 2nd person pronoun for a group of peope. So I picked it up more in adulthood and put it into my daily vernacular.

And also by Indian Christians (Catholics) in some parts of India, such as Mumbai and nearby areas, like Pune and Goa, along or near the Western coast of India. Partly grew up there, and also did some of my schooling there, that's how I know this.

I don't know if there is any historical connection between the usage of that phrase (y'all) in those two areas (of the US and India).

It could have been, via (US) Christian missionaries coming here. There were and still are some of them, in some parts of India, from more than 100 years ago. Again, I know this from experience.

That general area of India, and some other parts, do have a relatively high percentage of Christians.

bad-ai.js

const bad_words = [ " ai", "ai ", "a.i.", "openai", "llm", "agentic", "claude", "large language models", "apple intelligence" ]

var elements = document.body.getElementsByClassName("titleline");

for (var i = 0; i < elements.length; i++){ var element = elements[i]; var text = element.children[0].text.toLowerCase();

    bad_words.forEach(word => { 
        if( text.indexOf(word) > -1 ){
            console.log("Bad-AI remove: " + text)
            element.parentElement.parentElement.nextSibling.style.display = "none";
            element.parentElement.parentElement.style.display = "none";
        }
    });

manifest.json

{ "manifest_version": 2, "name": "No-Hacker-AI", "version": "1.0",

  "description": "Hide stories on HackerNews, if they mention AI technologies.",

  "icons": {
    "96": "icons/bad-ai.png"
  },

  "content_scripts": [
    {
      "matches": ["*://news.ycombinator.com/*"],
      "js": ["bad-ai.js"]
    }
  ]
}

Well, you apparently just did. Saturation is indeed relative (or rather, on a spectrum with varying subjective lines). You can explain why it's saturated, but that still means it's saturated.

>Like it or not AI is not only a huge trend, it really is a paradigm shift in all sorts of aspects

Sure, so was fracking. I wasn't in this community back then, but I'd wager somehow we didn't have 1 in 5 articles about how much better society can drill oil.

I guess that’s because that’s where a lot of VC and hypebuxx are right now, though.

In 10 years either advanced AI will have eaten everything or nobody will even remember any of this.

My position is that I think AI is an amazing tool, but that’s it. It’s like any other tool we humans have developed before – we use it to create more quickly, with less effort.

Personally, I don’t think we’re anywhere close to achieving AGI, and I find the tech bros’ AGI fantasies appalling.

The problem with the current wave of AI is that it isn't "generally useful" yet. These AI systems can be very effective in certain situations when they are used with the specific knowledge of their flaws, but they are being applied to a much too broad use case today. Granted the valid use cases for crypto were miniscule in comparison, so I won't quibble too much with your general point.

Although the most frustrating aspect to me is that the people who were shown to be right about crypto have not earned any gravitas when they say similar things about AI. So many charlatans were saved by a second bubble immediately inflating as the previous bubble popped and we are once again ignoring the people calling them charlatans despite the proven track record for calling out this behavior. Seemingly no one learned anything.

Generative image / video / audio models can produce output in image, video and audio. Those have far less applications than models that can output text, structured data and code.

"AGI is right around the corner" "No it's not" "Yes it is, LLMs are the future." "We don't even know if AGI is possible." "LLMs are the future." "No they aren't." "AGI is right around the corner..."

or

"LLMs are really useful." "No they're not" "Yes they are." "No they aren't." with a little bit of "They sucked the last time I used them." "Did you use them recently?" "That's what someone said last time." "But LLMs are really useful" ...

over and over and over.

It isn't even that it's mostly just LLMs being discussed, it's how they're begin discussed, they're effectively just a proxy for optimists and pessimists to argue over which worldview is better.

If we were talking about AI in general and not LLMs, the same conversation structures would still pop up.