I’m OK with that tbh. If we normalise disclosures for any use of AI, ever, the some AI vibe-code slop gets declared the same way as a meticulously crafted game (but the devs used AI for research/brainstorming), or even ‘devs used Google and they may have been inspired by the search AI’ etc

I think AI as a tech is pretty cool. I think using AI is less cool, since it is using far more resources than we can afford to give it, so I avoid using AI at all, even if I think the tech itself is morally neutral.

And I think the way we’re using AI is horrifying. Not just how companies push it, but the common use, too. People are outsourcing their thinking and comprehension to AI, and their own personal development is stagnating. This is particularly terrifying in children and college students. Would I rather than a doctor/social worker/financial advisor that gained a degree through AI and couldn’t adapt to real world struggle? Or none at all? Hmm.

I think there is a space for devs to use AI and not have it undermine what they’re doing, is what I mean. And so I don’t want to label those people the same as the ones who’ll get AI to do everything. Otherwise, with how much AI is used on our behalf even without consent, the AI label will become the norm… at which point, it ceases to mean anything.