-9
Since prejudice against AI opened the floodgates on criticizing developer tools, we should do the same for all tools (lemmus.org)
submitted 1 day ago by to c/unpopularopinion@lemmy.world
49 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Many people on Lemmy despise AI with a passion, and demand storefronts provide them with the ability to exercise their prejudice against developers choosing to use AI tools during development. I think it's silly, but if we're going to start judging developers based on the tools they used then we should expand the concept to the full extent. For example, many people here don't like Microsoft, and so developers should be forced to disclose whether they used Windows, Visual Studio or GitHub in development so that people can discriminate on that basis.

Personally I think Apple is the worst company in the technology industry, and I would like to be able to see which developers used Apple hardware in development so I can boycott them and make sure none of my funds are inadvertantly going to pay Apple. We're abandoning the old practice of simply judging software based on the end product, and instead we're scrutinizing the creation process itself, so we shouldn't stop at just AI usage. Let's pick apart every development decision that would otherwise be invisible to the end user.

Why stop at AI? Using a Mac is far more unethical in my view. Let's enable people to boycott on every single possible tool used, and not focus on a single one.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 1 day ago (7 children)

My critique of your position is that you are intentionally using these words to imply immorality where there is none, not that you are using the words incorrectly.

In other words, I believe you're trying to say that boycotting or calling out AI use is immoral in the same way that racism is immoral. If that's not what you are trying to say, then I would suggest using different words.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 0 points 1 day ago (6 children)

    I do believe it is an issue of morality, though. At least so far as people judging others for using AI. It's no different from judging someone based on their haircut, their tattoos, or the clothes they're wearing. All of these are choices.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 23 hours ago (5 children)

    There's nothing immoral about judging someone by their choices, though. Whether it's the clothes they wear or the tools they use. In fact, I would argue that their personal choices are the most morally defensible basis from which to form an opinion about someone.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 0 points 23 hours ago* (4 children)

    So would it not be accurate to say you're discriminating against people based on their clothes/facial hair/tattoos/etc? Or in other words, you're prejudiced against people with a beard/wearing a tie dye shirt/sporting a skull tattoo on their face? Those all seem like accurate words and statements to me.

    This is just adding a new discrimination/prejudice to the list. Discriminating against a developer based on their choice to use AI. Prejudiced against people who utilize LLMs. It's just as much based on an individuals morals as they relate to the other person's judgment. Unless I'm missing something?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 21 hours ago (3 children)

    The issue I'm pointing to isn't that you're misusing the words technically, but that you seem to be using them to draw a parallel to unfair discrimination and prejudice, such as in racism.

    The strict definition of a word can vary from its connotation in context, and a well-communicated idea accounts for both. If it was never your intention to draw a parallel to racism or other forms of bigotry then your opinion as presented is less "unpopular" and more "badly communicated".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 0 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

    But 'fair' is entirely subjective. Moreso than almost any other term. What you think is fair isn't what I think is fair, and vice versa.

    I try not to discriminate against anyone, as I aspire to be an egalitarian, but if society is gung ho on discriminating then let's go all the way. People who hate AI can discriminate against those who celebrate it, and people who hate Apple can discriminate against their customers. That seems fair to me. Does it to you?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 20 hours ago (1 child)

    People who hate AI can discriminate against those who celebrate it, and people who hate Apple can discriminate against their customers. That seems fair to me. Does it to you?

    I see zero problem with this, at least from a moral or ethical point of view, and except perhaps describing it as "hate". This is another choice of words that seems to draw a parallel to racism and other forms of bigotry.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •