criti-hype, manufacturing consent, and whatever this is

https://nmn.gl/blog/ai-illiterate-programmers

What is this?

The title, “AI is Creating a Generation of Illiterate Programmers” clickbaits you into thinking this is anti-AI propaganda (a good thing).

The contents are seemingly good criticisms of AI, intermixed with—

Well…

Deranged caveats

I’m not suggesting anything radical like going AI-free completely—that’s unrealistic.

What?

The status quo of 2-3 years ago, and most people today¹, is unrealistic?

I’m not suggesting we abandon AI tools—that ship has sailed.

No, it hasn’t?!?! You can abandon them! Just don’t use them! Look, I’m doing it right now!

Presumably, though, the author is not “most people”. They advertise multiple times on this webpage that they’re building their own AI programming tool.

The scariest part? I’m building an AI-powered development tool, but I can’t shake the feeling I’m contributing to the very problem that’s eroding our collective skills.

Good — stop shaking!

The pieces clicked later than I’d like to admit for me. Of course abandoning AI is a radical idea for the author—it means abandoning their business and retracting (years? months? TODO research the author) of public communication.

Another thing “clicked” when that “radical” suggestion jostled me awake and I went back to the start of the article to read it properly this time:

I’m not sure if this is really criticism

Every single “criticism” in this post boils down to “AI makes it hard to go without AI, because AI is so useful.” A cliche as old as the first crow to dig for worms with a stick—replace “AI” with anything from pen-and-paper to that damn phone. I wouldn’t consider it valid criticism under any other context. My anti-AI bias dulled my senses.

One of the best ways to attack a point is to defend it badly. Is this article from a proud purveyor of “AI tools to enhance human potential” really sincere? (It probably is; I’m probably just being conspiratorial).

Here’s some ideas that I have:

• No AI for problems that you haven’t tried to understand first
• Read and understand all AI-suggested solutions
• Regular periods of coding without AI assistance
• Focus on learning patterns, not just fixing immediate issues

A vendor of AI tools, waxing concerned about the harms of AI tools, suggests steps for the users of those tools to mitigate those harms.

You know how plastic manufacturers have popularized recycling to pacify the public about the harms of their products, and shift responsibility to the consumer? TODO EXPOUND; CITATION NEEDED

As of now, AI isn’t capable enough to replace programmers fully, but this will only get worse as it improves.

Things that do not exist yet do not exist.

Is this a conspiracy?

This is kind of like criti-hype, but not quite. Criti-hype, in every context I’ve seen it, refers to critics who unwittingly promote what they criticize. But this person has every reason to promote the class of product, so how unwitting could they possibly be? (Very. Never underestimate the power of a true believer).

My conspiratorial side would call it an example of manufacturing consent. The expression “that ship has sailed” was what set off my propaganda alarm bells—it echoed the cryptocoin/web3/metaverse boosters who, having failed to persuade you that their anti-technology is desirable, resort to insisting it is inevitable and you should “adapt”, i.e. you need to convince yourself to like it.

I’ll put my charitable hat back on, though. I’ve met LLM fanatics. They’re flesh and blood like the rest of us. These technologies are a means to a sinister end, but they also have their sincere appreciators.

The limits of self-deprecation and self-awareness

My more grounded (I think) theory of what happened is that OP is trying to recognize and acknowledge the criticisms of AI usage, to be a responsible person. Though they ultimately disagree with harsh critics of AI, he agrees they have at least some valid points.

(I was going to put one of those wojak memes [coomer, doomer etc.] — then I realized that would entail making a wojak with my own godly hands. Eugh.)

This is a very uneasy position to be in, and a common situation for people who actively seek to live more ethically. Eventually, you find your limit, the one thing that completely goes against your values that you can’t bring yourself to stop doing. In making this post, OP is not trying to convince us that AI’s harms are mitigable, he’s trying to mitigate them and in doing so convince himself.

I find it hard to get mad at OP. I also do things that I know I shouldn’t. I also spinelessly yap about those things. Maybe someone else will get inspired to change their behavior. Offset my gluttony, strangers!

Well, I’ve managed to turn this dunk post into something self critical at the last minute, which makes it okay to spend N words shitting on a stranger’s (by now, relatively old) blog post and publishing it on the internet. See you!