Children are more vulnerable and more easily influenced, and so are easily swept up by a new technology being rolled out non-consensually society wide, much like social media ~20 years ago.
Ive seen HN been filled with plenty of vitrol and hatred. Dang etc does clean it up mostly, but its still often here behind a veneer. Ive also seen really good opinions and ideas. It isnt black and white.
And no I dont think that generally, but it just seems like so many tech people here have been kinda mid/upper class/well off. I think a core issue around AI, around a new technology, is the class/capitalism issue, because that is the system we are stuck in.
But maybe some also havent quite connected the dots, and are starting to wake up to the reality of the situation.
Its divided because its the first time the previously more class unaware techbros have been critically challenged by the consequences of their actions - oh shit we might lose our jobs.
10 years ago "Disrupting X" was seen as a good thing. Now its come for them its a different story.
Technology is not some pure thing detached from emotions, society, feelings, and consequences.
Code isn't just a means to an end for a lot of people.
More people are now realizing that society has no protections around losing your job - what little power they had is going to be stripped away. Or its going to be used to reduce their power - you know have to work more bc you can use ai to do it! Ive already seen this.
Sure ai in a vacuum is a really interesting thing, oh its cool it can produce code or whatever. The underlying issue however is capitalism.
There is kind of a spec - its capture knowledge work / thought so they can sell it back to you. Just how uber captured delivery/taxi making it all cheap and subsidised to start with the goal is to embed it everywhere and make people dependent. And then maybe some hope in the future they no longer have to pay anyone, or maybe pay people far less and devalue them.
Of course there are different levels of violence. One person inciting hate online is different to bombing a country back to the stone age, but they are both violent. No a traffic offense shouldn't get you assaulted.
But big ceo or president shouldn't necessarily be surprised about consequences to say it bluntly, and to tie it back to our original point, its funny its such an issue now to dang and others here.
Its like suddenly an issue when that violence is directed at someone who does have a lot of power rather than the other way around.
I feel you could argue denying health claims is violent, its intending to cause harm - there is a choice there.