I think he doesn’t understand “anti-ai”

rhetorical question: when you’re anti-*, do you go out and do the thing you’re against? Like if you’re anti-smoking, do you go out and smoke a big fat vape? No, you do not. In other terminology, we call that hypocrisy.

I’d say the majority of people’s reasons against AI isn’t just about the environmental impact but the offloading of your cognitive and mental ability, why would someone be anti-ai and still use ai when it directly hinders the ability to cognitively think in the first place.

Anyways, the reason I’m pointing this out, is if you’re anti-ai, the philosophy assumes you don’t use LLM’s in the first place. So when someone asks this (redundant) question of “can you work without chatgpt?” or “if chatgpt disappeared, would you still be able to get through the day?” I’ve already been doing it.

I can get through my day without using chatGPT. It’s a tool for the briefest of my circumstances (mostly for tedious work), and I could do my day without using it and without hindering my performance.