Technology

d u h

I've learned to hate companies that replaced their support staff with AI. I don't mind if it supplements easy stuff, that should take like 15 seconds, but when I have to jump through a bunch of hoops to get to the one lone bastard stuck running the support desk on their own, I start to wonder why I give them any money at all.

I've sold actual zero trust, actual AI, actual DevX, etc.. I'm so tired of "yeah, everyone else just throws a label on, why the fuck do I need AI in my bank app? We have the REAL blah blah blah"

Maybe I'd be more interested in AI if there was any I with the A. At the moment, there's no more intelligence to these things than there is in a parrot with brain damage, or a human child. Language Models can mimic speech but are unable to formulate any original thoughts. Until they can, they aren't AI and I won't be the slightest bit interested beyond trying to break them into being slightly dirty (and therefore slightly funny).

AI is a neat toy... but that's all it is. It's horrible at almost every real-world application it's been forced into, and that's before you wander into the whole shifting minefield of ethical concerns or consider how wildly untrustworthy they are.

AI has some pretty good uses.

But in the majority of junk on the market it is nothing but marketing bloatware.

"AI" is certainly a turn-off for me, I would ask a salesman "do you have one that doesn't have that?" and I will now enumerate why:

1. LLMs are wrongness machines. They do have an almost miraculous ability to string words together to form coherent sentences but when they have no basis at all in truth it's nothing but an extremely elaborate and expensive party trick. I don't want actual services like web searches replaced with elaborate party tricks.

2. In a lot of cases it's being used as a buzzword to mean basically anything computer controlled or networked. Last time I looked up they were using the word "smart" to mean that. A clothes dryer that can sense the humidity of the exhaust air to know when the clothes are dry isn't any more "AI" than my 90's microwave that can sense the puff of steam from a bag of popcorn. This is the kind of outright dishonest marketing I'd like to see fail so spectacularly that people in the advertising business go missing over it.

3. I already avoided "smart" appliances and will avoid "AI" appliances for the same reasons: The "smart" functionality doesn't actually run locally, it has to connect to a server out on the internet to work, which means that while that server is still up and offering support to my device, I have a hole in my firewall. And then they'll stop support ten minutes after the warranty expires and the device will no longer work. For many of these devices there's no reason the "smart" functionality couldn't run locally on some embedded ARM chip or talk to some application running on a PC that I own inside my firewall, other than "then we don't get your data."

4. AI is apparently consuming more electricity than air conditioning. In fact, I'm not convinced that power consumption isn't the selling point they're pushing at board meetings. "It'll keep our friends in the pollution industry in business."

Yet companies are manipulating survey results to justify the FOMO jump to AI bandwagon. I don't know where companies get the info that people want AI (looking at you Proton).

Lets see if this finally kills the AI hype. Big tech is pushing for AI because it is the ultimate spyware, nothing more.

I've been applying similar thinking to my job search. When I see AI listed in a job description, I immediately put the company into one of 3 categories:

1. It is an AI company that may go out of business suddenly within the next few years leaving me unemployed and possibly without any severance.
2. Management has drank the Kool-Aid and is hoping AI will drive their profit growth, which makes me question management competence. This also has a high likelihood of future job loss, but at least they might pay severance.
3. The buzzword was tossed in to make the company look good to investors, but it is not highly relevant to their business. These companies get a partial pass for me.

A company in the first two categories would need to pay a lot to entice me and I would not value their equity offering. The third category is understandable, especially if the success of AI would threaten their business.

It's because consumers aren't the dumbasses these companies think they are and we all know that the AI being shoved into everything fucking sucks worse than the systems we had before "AI."