this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2025
42 points (88.9% liked)

Technology

4919 readers
524 users here now

Which posts fit here?

Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.


Post guidelines

[Opinion] prefixOpinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original linkPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip


Icon attribution | Banner attribution


If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The article title is very click baity, but I found the actual discussion and reasoning for why this will happen and how it can be stopped to be thoughtful.

top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] iii@mander.xyz 22 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

There's only 2 proposed problems in the article as far as I can tell. They're not novel ideas, and the author brings no new evidence:

  1. "AI"’s disruption of the labor market.
  2. "AI" as magnifier of existing problems: fake news, scamming, military applications, domestic surveillance.

2/10 would not recommend the article

[–] salacious_coaster@infosec.pub 16 points 4 months ago

I'm thinking that gizmodo is not a very good publication

[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

AI is going to be a good scapegoat as to why the current asset focused economy crashes when nobody can afford to buy the assets because they've exploited themselves to oblivion. We're already going into a complete structural breakdown because the structure itself is already deranged. Trying to extrapolate how AI is going to decouple productive value further in a system where assets already are skyrocketing and wages are stagnant is foolish in my opinion. It's already decoupled and barreling down the track with no brakes. It's like blaming air BnBs for housing prices. Stupid and reductive.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 12 points 4 months ago

I don't think it was made to usher in utopia, but dystopian nightmare seems likely.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 2 points 4 months ago
[–] NuraShiny@hexbear.net 1 points 4 months ago

Knowingly marching towards societal doom. Great. Murder these motherfuckers now and shut it all down.