Death to AI

[Lynx]

I hope it dies. I hope this hype of AI reverts and people stop using it. It's getting on my last nerve.

The use of AI has literally caused people to stop thinking altogether. They are just using it to think for them. Instead of conversations, people just copy/past AI responses. Instead of debating interpretations with people, you're just talking to AI's. People are even using it during normal conversations with the same argument that they're just using it to polish what they say. (Doubt it.)

Social Media brought internet warriors and lack of responsibility as people can hide behind anonymity. And society got worse as we started treating each other worse.

AI then took it to another level... giving internet warriors a tool and other people a means to never think again!

Also howdy and welcome to the forum. It says you've been here for a while but I haven't seen you until now, so howdy now.

 

[HeIsHere]

I hope it dies. I hope this hype of AI reverts and people stop using it. It's getting on my last nerve.

The use of AI has literally caused people to stop thinking altogether. They are just using it to think for them. Instead of conversations, people just copy/past AI responses. Instead of debating interpretations with people, you're just talking to AI's. People are even using it during normal conversations with the same argument that they're just using it to polish what they say. (Doubt it.)

Social Media brought internet warriors and lack of responsibility as people can hide behind anonymity. And society got worse as we started treating each other worse.

AI then took it to another level... giving internet warriors a tool and other people a means to never think again!

There are benefits to AI, it can read a MRI's better than humans and probably many more helpful medical application where it can help save lives.

I think lawyers have caused tremendous harm over the past 100 years, and I think that is probably measurable if someone took the time, or perhaps it has already been done, not sure, however ... a world with far less lawyers is very welcome in my book.

AI needs to have guard rails and that is the challenge.

 

[tourist]

it is a good thing to hope for, but it is probably not going to happen,

No, it is probably not going to happen. Things are going to get much worse.

 

[tourist]

.
Honor your age and keep your memory, and you will observe the changes caused by the result of mankind's works causing the earth to be polluted under its inhabitants, today more than ever.

Words of wisdom.

 

[NightTwister]

I use AI at work. It's helpful for evaluating software to find problems and efficiencies. In the IT world it will only be used more and more.

 

[Bible_Locket]

Yes - YT is "chock full" of AI - as in - "gone crazy" with AI - it is very annoying.

One of the worst things about it is when they make up something about this-or-that famous person - when it is not true - they are only using the name and life of the famous person to produce click-bait videos.

"Nothing but deception..."

I am getting really really very tired of it.

Fake news has always been an issue. AI makes it worse.

Even AI in search engines warns readers AI can make mistakes.

That's so cute.
AI: here's all the info I can find for you.
But I could be wrong.

 

[Anchorite]

It is very annoying when a forum member replies with AI slop to every post, instead of thinking and responding in their own words.

Playing with AI is like goofing around with a loaded handgun whose barrel is twisted to point back at you.

AI developers are striving to make an omniscient entity that people will rely upon, obey, and worship.

Technology is not always innocent. Some tech is inherently evil — nuclear weapons, torture chambers, gender reassignment surgery, genetically modified food, lab produced poisons, germ warfare, abortion, etc.

AI is like a drug people experiment with, get addicted, and go into cognitive decline, especially younger individuals.

Adults Lose Skills to AI. Children Never Build Them.

Discussions of cognitive offloading often miss a critical distinction: What AI does to a 45-year-old's brain is categorically different from what it does to a 14-year-old's.

www.psychologytoday.com

Shen and Tamkin's 2026 preprint showed this with software developers (adults) learning a new coding library. Developers who fully delegated to AI produced working code but failed conceptual quizzes afterward. They couldn't debug what the AI had written for them. They had the output without the understanding.


Remember: These were adults with existing programming expertise. They performed 17 percent worse that the group without AI assistance.

Now consider a child encountering programming for the first time with zero expertise to fall back on. There’s no reference to even compare AI output against. The substitution becomes foreclosure.

 

[Anchorite]

I use AI at work. It's helpful for evaluating software to find problems and efficiencies. In the IT world it will only be used more and more.

AI tends to write brittle code that does not consider edge cases, business-specific use cases, or maintainability.

It simply writes way too much code. The more you rely on it, the higher it will layer on code that acts like a house of cards until eventually…

It falls over.

Remember this simple rule of code: more code == more surface area for bugs

Here are my hard-and-fast rules for when to use AI vs when not to use it.​

1. Tedious work that I can easily do but will take a while like updating types in a TypeScript project or breaking up a large component into multiple components.
2. UI updates. Drag and drop an image and have AI do its best to get you started.
3. Prototyping. This is where AI really shines. If I’m curious what a large refactor might look like I can just have Claude or Cursor start it off. A proof-of-concept is a perfect use case or any scenario where you don’t care much about code quality.
4. Bug discovery. From code reviews to thought partner — I will ask Claude or Cursor to poke holes in my logic, ask if I missed any edge cases or suggestions on database schemas. It’s great to either validate my ideas or challenge my assumptions.
5. Code whisperer. I work at a small company and often look over work from our data scientists. I use AI to verify my understanding and explain mathematical concepts that are beyond my simple brain.

Now here’s when I tell my little code monkey to kick rocks:​

1. Anything mission critical. If the code breaking means a severe incident might occur then that is generally off limits.
2. TDD. The jury is still out here but I’ve noticed a very sinister phenomenon when AI writes tests for it’s own code — it cheats! Hard-coded return values. Mocking the functions it’s supposed to test so they always pass tests?! Pure insanity and now you can’t trust the code OR the tests.
3. When I want a simple solution. I don’t need a rate limiter for this API in an internal web app. I certainly don’t need a README for every component. I don’t need a useless comment above every line of code.

—-from https://brianjenney.medium.com/coding-in-the-age-of-ai-what-no-ones-telling-you-c5fa414cee06

 

[NightTwister]

AI tends to write brittle code that does not consider edge cases, business-specific use cases, or maintainability.

It simply writes way too much code. The more you rely on it, the higher it will layer on code that acts like a house of cards until eventually…

It falls over.

Remember this simple rule of code: more code == more surface area for bugs

Here are my hard-and-fast rules for when to use AI vs when not to use it.​

1. Tedious work that I can easily do but will take a while like updating types in a TypeScript project or breaking up a large component into multiple components.
2. UI updates. Drag and drop an image and have AI do its best to get you started.
3. Prototyping. This is where AI really shines. If I’m curious what a large refactor might look like I can just have Claude or Cursor start it off. A proof-of-concept is a perfect use case or any scenario where you don’t care much about code quality.
4. Bug discovery. From code reviews to thought partner — I will ask Claude or Cursor to poke holes in my logic, ask if I missed any edge cases or suggestions on database schemas. It’s great to either validate my ideas or challenge my assumptions.
5. Code whisperer. I work at a small company and often look over work from our data scientists. I use AI to verify my understanding and explain mathematical concepts that are beyond my simple brain.

Now here’s when I tell my little code monkey to kick rocks:​

1. Anything mission critical. If the code breaking means a severe incident might occur then that is generally off limits.
2. TDD. The jury is still out here but I’ve noticed a very sinister phenomenon when AI writes tests for it’s own code — it cheats! Hard-coded return values. Mocking the functions it’s supposed to test so they always pass tests?! Pure insanity and now you can’t trust the code OR the tests.
3. When I want a simple solution. I don’t need a rate limiter for this API in an internal web app. I certainly don’t need a README for every component. I don’t need a useless comment above every line of code.

—-from https://brianjenney.medium.com/coding-in-the-age-of-ai-what-no-ones-telling-you-c5fa414cee06

Wow, that's a lot. You clearly didn't read my comment. I said I use it to find problems and efficiencies. I write my own code, and I validate anything I get back from AI.

 

[Anchorite]

Wow, that's a lot. You clearly didn't read my comment. I said I use it to find problems and efficiencies. I write my own code, and I validate anything I get back from AI.

I clearly did read, and quote, your comment. I just thought you’d be interested in what this programmer said.

 

[Delvianna]

What does it reveal/say about the attitude of a person who reads the OP of a thread expressing [deep] regret for having to put up with never-ending constantly-in-your-face AI-produced content and then proceeds to "fill up" the thread with AI-produced content?

These come to mind:

callous
careless
heartless
insensitive
meanspirited
pretentious
uncaring
uncharitable
uncompassionate
unconcerned
unfriendly
unkind

The irony is not lost on me, and I agree completely with your list.

 

[Delvianna]

Also howdy and welcome to the forum. It says you've been here for a while but I haven't seen you until now, so howdy now.

Thank you very much!

 

[Delvianna]

There are benefits to AI, it can read a MRI's better than humans and probably many more helpful medical application where it can help save lives.

I think lawyers have caused tremendous harm over the past 100 years, and I think that is probably measurable if someone took the time, or perhaps it has already been done, not sure, however ... a world with far less lawyers is very welcome in my book.

AI needs to have guard rails and that is the challenge.

Are there some benefits? Sure, but I think the problems outweigh the benefits. I do not think AI should be public use. If you want to use it for missile guidance systems, have at it. You want to use it for back-end business practices to make it more efficient, again... have at it. But it's like social media, you can't tell me the world is a better place because of it.

 

[NightTwister]

I clearly did read, and quote, your comment. I just thought you’d be interested in what this programmer said.

I'm a programmer. Why aren't you equally interested in what I have to say?

 

[Anchorite]

I'm a programmer. Why aren't you equally interested in what I have to say?

I am interested in what you have to say.

 

[cv5]

I hope it dies. I hope this hype of AI reverts and people stop using it. It's getting on my last nerve.

The use of AI has literally caused people to stop thinking altogether. They are just using it to think for them. Instead of conversations, people just copy/past AI responses. Instead of debating interpretations with people, you're just talking to AI's. People are even using it during normal conversations with the same argument that they're just using it to polish what they say. (Doubt it.)

Social Media brought internet warriors and lack of responsibility as people can hide behind anonymity. And society got worse as we started treating each other worse.

AI then took it to another level... giving internet warriors a tool and other people a means to never think again!

"debating interpretations"

Hhhmmmm. Not much to debate realistically. If you know what you are talking about that is.

Everything is 99.99% settled as far as I am concerned. And take my word for it.....it's a great feeling.

 

[NightTwister]

I am interested in what you have to say.

AI is a tool. Like any tool it can be used or misused.

 

[Delvianna]

"debating interpretations"

Hhhmmmm. Not much to debate realistically. If you know what you are talking about that is.

Everything is 99.99% settled as far as I am concerned. And take my word for it.....it's a great feeling.

There are almost 20 different major denominations, all of which have different theology. So essentially you're saying, you've found living in your own echo-chamber "a great feeling" because for you, your interpretation is one you're sticking with and you don't know scripture well enough to actually have any debate, since you want to constantly use AI for your responses. I mean, sure... have fun with that.

 

[cv5]

There are almost 20 different major denominations, all of which have different theology. So essentially you're saying, you've found living in your own echo-chamber "a great feeling" because for you, your interpretation is one you're sticking with and you don't know scripture well enough to actually have any debate, since you want to constantly use AI for your responses. I mean, sure... have fun with that.

Really? So according to your overarching premise, the Apostle Paul was living in his own "echo-chamber"?

Hardly. But rather, Paul knew EXACTLY what he was talking about. He knew accurate doctrine PRECISELY, and it was invariant.

And.....I understand Paul's invariant doctrine with extreme fidelity.

You see friend, you have confessed your own shortcomings and ignorance. And you can. And yes, you definitely ARE ignorant of Paul's doctrine.

However you wrongly assume that I suffer from the same shortcomings and ignorance of Paul's doctrine as you.

I do not.

You see, you don't "get it". You also don't understand that I DO "get it".

Whereas I understand BOTH that you don't "get it" and that I DO "get it"!

 

[Anchorite]

Really? So according to your overarching premise, the Apostle Paul was living in his own "echo-chamber"?

Hardly. But rather, Paul knew EXACTLY what he was talking about. He knew accurate doctrine PRECISELY, and it was invariant.

And.....I understand Paul's invariant doctrine with extreme fidelity.



You see, you don't "get it". You also don't understand that I DO "get it".

Whereas I understand BOTH that you don't "get it" and that I DO "get it"!

And here we have a vivid manifestation of narcissistic pride.

This is the opposite of the spirit of Christ.



Matthew 11:29

Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.


1 Corinthians 10:12

Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.