This is a really poorly written article. The author doesn’t seem to understand the meaning of “AI slop” (he equates it with LLM-generated code), and hasn’t seemed to have thought through the economics of his AI-everywhere assertion.
Anyway, denial or not, his vision of the likely future is one in which individual humans become irrelevant slaves to either AI or massive corporations. Why would any self-respecting human accept that outcome?
> Anyway, denial or not, his vision of the likely future is one in which individual humans become irrelevant slaves to either AI or massive corporations. Why would any self-respecting human accept that outcome?
There is a difference between “accept” as in ‘this is what I would want’ and what actually happens.
There are lots of reasons why things don’t go the way individuals want them to. Predicting the future is hard. Practically speaking, people have constrained agency. Getting organized to make significant change can be hard (i.e. collective action problems) even when everybody knows things are messed up.
Anyway, denial or not, his vision of the likely future is one in which individual humans become irrelevant slaves to either AI or massive corporations. Why would any self-respecting human accept that outcome?