Whenever AI is mentioned lots of people in the Linux space immediately react negatively. Creators like TheLinuxExperiment on YouTube always feel the need to add a disclaimer that “some people think AI is problematic” or something along those lines if an AI topic is discussed. I get that AI has many problems but at the same time the potential it has is immense, especially as an assistant on personal computers (just look at what “Apple Intelligence” seems to be capable of.) Gnome and other desktops need to start working on integrating FOSS AI models so that we don’t become obsolete. Using an AI-less desktop may be akin to hand copying books after the printing press revolution. If you think of specific problems it is better to point them out and try think of solutions, not reject the technology as a whole.

TLDR: A lot of ludite sentiments around AI in Linux community.

  • FatCat@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Right, another aspect of the Luddite movement is that they lost. They failed to stop the spread of industrialization and machinery in factories.

    Screaming at a train moving 200kmph hoping it will stop.

      • FatCat@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Work on useful alternatives to big corpo crapware = lick the boot?

        Mkay…

        • kronisk @lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          It was more in response to your comments. I don’t think anyone has a problem with useful FOSS alternatives per se.

    • davel@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      You misunderstand the Luddite movement. They weren’t anti-technology, they were anti-capitalist exploitation.

      The 1810s: The Luddites act against destitution

      It is fashionable to stigmatise the Luddites as mindless blockers of progress. But they were motivated by an innate sense of self-preservation, rather than a fear of change. The prospect of poverty and hunger spurred them on. Their aim was to make an employer (or set of employers) come to terms in a situation where unions were illegal.

      • FatCat@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        They probably wouldn’t be such a laughing stock if they were successful.