Here's my problem with people who are enthusiastic about the gains of so-called #AI for, e.g. programming or #accessibility: Are the more reasonable of them, that is the ones who are not outspoken technofascists and "share concerns" about the technology, its governance, and its material effects, willing to support resistance to the technology in its current form? Even if resistance slows down the development of the technology or takes some affordances away altogether, disrupting or degrading the workflows they've come to rely on?
In other words, are they willing to sacrifice some of their new independence and conveniences for what they acknowledge to be labor/environmental/community justice? Or are they assuming that any such changes for the better would or must be gradual and imperceptible enough not to inconvenience them? Which makes them angrier — the excesses and wholesale looting by the billionaire class, or people's resistance to such excess? That's the true test to me.
I do understand: you want permission. There’s a machine in the corner wrapped in human skin that makes things out of shit and blood to look like whatever you want (as long as you don’t look too closely). You gave one to your teacher and they didn’t notice. Your boss told you to use it after they laid off half the team and it was fine. You fed one to your kids and they liked it. You want to know you can use it sometimes without me thinking less of you. You don’t need me to believe it’s useful, you just want me to be polite about it.
But I am a hater, and I will not be polite. The machine is disgusting and we should break it. The people who build it are vapid shit-eating cannibals glorifying ignorance. I strongly feel that this is an insult to life itself.
– Anthony Moser, I Am An #AI Hater https://anthonymoser.github.io/writing/ai/haterdom/2025/08/26/i-am-an-ai-hater.html
#NoAI
I Am An AI Hater