I think people’s reactions are a spectrum (like what else in life is not?). There are the AI cultists who believe the marketing lies of AI companies that AI is sentinent and allmighty, able to solve every problem on earth as long as the companies get more money to burn. And there are the AI enemies who deny AI has any use besides disrupting the job market, wasting ressources and enslave the masses. I guess both extremes are wrong and the sane ground lies between the two.

The problem is that most average citizens are so illiterare with technology that they believe the marketing until proven otherwise… the narrative is shaped by media and media influence can be bought (with investor money). The fact that many reporters don’t know what current “AI” is also isn’t particulary helpful.

I think it’s like the .com-Bubble: The Bubble will burst, many enthusiasts will lose a lot of money… but we’ll keep using and developing specialized tools in areas where they actually create a ROI worth having.

I also don’t know if your sword-gun-comparisson works out as there are first results that imply that using AI for every task doesn’t necessarily makes the user more efficent but also dumper as he/she isn’t challenged cognitively anymore. I wouldn’t say this is an advantage for the individual per default.

I think it’s more about a ,see the machines were unsecure, so we’re ignoring the election outcome" plan.

Also to discredit and/or try to nullify a not-so-favorable election outcome afterwards.

They see the bubble collapsing and want to postpone the inevetable by ,voluntarily slowing" development.

Sounds like the same play book that is used with great success in Europe currently.

Why is this news?

Zuckerberg ist going to call Cheeto Benito and he’ll find a way to supress the trials outcome.

…I’m tired.