yes, so bored. yada yada.. i've been 'obsolete' for 36 years and counting.

No.

I am. To keep talking about it I might just deploy a chatbot to do that for me.

I wish there was an option to hide AI stories on HN, and AI-related repos on Github's trending page.

You could use AI to do it! Fight fire with fire.

I'm neutral on AI - so far it seems useful but flawed. But I don't want to hear about it constantly.

How does such a shallow post get so much attention? It's a circle meeting of engineers having a crisis? If so I'm happy to accelerate it by posting here and numbers go up.

Never tired of talking about AI. There are so many fascinating aspects to explore and papers delivering new ideas. It's a bit tiring keeping up with the new stuff but talking about what we've found is one of the things that makes it easier to keep up.

I'm somewhat tired of seeing the same rehashed claims of future ability, non-ability, profit, loss.

I actually like talking about the implications, future risks and challenges of AI. I have made submissions on ways AI should be regulated to benefit society. The problem is the assumption of what is happening and what will happen.

To many people seem to enter the conversation feeling that the absence of doubt is the same thing as being informed.

And especially people making claims based on premises that they seem to believe that if they build big enough towers on them, they will become true.

The number one thing that bothers me in all this, is people assuming the contents of the minds of others.

I find the pathologising of Sam Altman to be the most egregious form of this. It is one thing to disagree with someone's decisions, another thing to disagree with their stated opinions, but to decide upon a person's character based upon what you believe they are thinking in their private thoughts is simply projection.

I know this is an opinion of little worth to many, but my impression of Sam Altman is just a person who has different perspectives to me. The capitalist tech world he lives in would inevitably shape different values to me. What I have seen of him is consistent with a sincere expression of values. I can accept that a person might do something different to what I would, even the opposite of what I want while believing that they can be doing so for reasons that seem to be morally the right thing to do.

This also happened with cryptocurrency. Crypto advocates believe that it is a good thing for the world. Too many consider those who believe that crypto could benefit society to be evil. There is a difference between being wrong and being evil. No matter how certain you are you can still be wrong, in fact beyond a point I would say increased certancy would indicate a higher likelihood of being wrong.

So I'm happy to talk about AI. I have plenty to learn. I wonder if others went in with the goal to learn whether they would find it less tiring.

It's all we can talk about at work and I'm really tired of it. Yes, I use Claude every day to write 98% of my code, but it's fine we can talk about other things. We don't have to talk about the tools we are using constantly. And yes no one knows exactly what will happen, how much better it will get, will we lose our jobs, and other concerns. All of that is something you could worry about, but there's nothing to be done in continuously discussing it.

Management spins up something on Lovable and believes that building any software is as easy as typing a few prompts.

It's worse when there's a colleague of yours encouraging that by using AI blindly, piling up technical debt just to move at the pace that Management expects after signing you all up on some AI tool.

At the end of the day, everyone is talking about AI. For AI or against AI, it doesn't really matter.

To answer the OP's question, apparently not! :)

Of course talking about AI is boring.

The analogy is someone from the 19th century talking about their slaves all day which is of course nonsense because they had other things to talk about.