This isn't an attack on the technology, it's an observation: we're about to, once again, let the same people profit while treating everyone else as cash cows. Just like every other time these people get the chance. Under the cover of "we're doing it for the good of humanity," they line their pockets a little more.
The article explicitly acknowledges the value and the power of AI. The problem isn't the tool, it's that it's in the wrong hands: instead of benefiting everyone, it'll only benefit a handful of people whose interests are in the wrong place.
And about the "ai-isms": maybe the author used AI to structure an idea and source the piece. Refusing to use a tool just because you criticize how it's being used would be missing the entire point. The critique isn't about the hammer, it's about who's holding it and who it's hitting.
This isn't an attack on the technology, it's an observation: we're about to, once again, let the same people profit while treating everyone else as cash cows. Just like every other time these people get the chance. Under the cover of "we're doing it for the good of humanity," they line their pockets a little more. The article explicitly acknowledges the value and the power of AI. The problem isn't the tool, it's that it's in the wrong hands: instead of benefiting everyone, it'll only benefit a handful of people whose interests are in the wrong place.
And about the "ai-isms": maybe the author used AI to structure an idea and source the piece. Refusing to use a tool just because you criticize how it's being used would be missing the entire point. The critique isn't about the hammer, it's about who's holding it and who it's hitting.