upvote

points

by thomassmith654 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby MaybiusStrip2 hours ago|
next
[-]
The only people underwhelmed by AI in February 2026 are people who have formed an identity around being AI skeptics over the last couple years and are struggling to shed it. I haven't met anyone who has seriously used the new models who isn't a at least a bit awed and disturbed.
reply
upvoteby thomassmith652 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
That's very true in terms of how capable these chatbots clearly are, but I believe the author was using 'underwhelming' to refer to the societal impact.

So far, life goes on roughly the same as it did five years ago. This can feel 'underwhelming' in contrast to the onslaught of public discussion about, and huge investments in, AI.

Most of us here on HN are programmers, and we all know how radically LLMs have changed our code projects. Even so, the change to our everyday lives (aside from our work or hobby project) is not, just yet, glaringly obvious. This year, it's mainly... every website shoves an AI box on its site that nobody seems to want!

reply
upvoteby bojan59 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
There is also that contrast about it being genuinely useful for work/programming and the fact that, for now, it changes the rest of my life in a negative way - by making PC hardware unavailable, by hearing every day I'll be out of work in 6-24 months, and by having to deal with people taking the information from Chat for granted.
reply
upvoteby skeeter20202 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
This statment is really annoying and getting boring. There are A LOT of us who have built careers evaluating technology with healthy skepticism, finding where it works and were it doesn't, excited to share & learn - and we've heard "this time it's different" many times. Now because we refuse to jump in without that same nuance and thought, and proclaim "everything's different over night!" we're branded as ludites when we're really trying find a balance.

I don't hear people saying "nothing is going to change", but I do hear questions about the timeline and if the current levels of investment match returns. Branding these people as stuck in some sort of negative identity is bullshit.

reply
upvoteby shruggedatlas2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
What is your position on AI?
reply
upvoteby skeeter202057 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
in a nutshell: AI - even if transformative and in the future a widely used general-purpose technology - is normal technology. I reject the technological determinism that is being fed to us, especially the idea that AI itself is an agent in defining its own future. I think adoption and the post-adoption spread will be slow & uncertain (relative to the current messaging) regardless of where it ultimately takes us. I think the absolute societal impact is grossly overstated, and the roles of institutions shaping the path underestimated or ignored.
reply
upvoteby sumanthvepa1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Not true. I'm a really heavy user of AI. And it's improved my productivity dramatically as a developer, but it doesn't work in every situation even in programming. I see it as an indispensible tool, but its not, right now, a tool that will replace me as a programmer or product manager or salesperson, or marketer. or (in my case) an owner and investor.

Will that happen in the future, maybe. but I don't have enough insight into how AI is evolving in the labs to make a judgement on that.

reply
upvoteby 2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
deleted
reply
upvoteby jdub2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
You're likely to find more nuance in opposing views than your "underwhelmed by AI" generalisation could represent.
reply
upvoteby emp173442 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
You’re creating a false dichotomy to alienate perceived opponents. Frankly, it’s really annoying and close-minded, and you haven’t contributed anything to the conversation.
reply
upvoteby selridge2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
[flagged]
reply
upvoteby mortenjorck3 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
"AI is a bubble!"

"AI will change everything!"

Few seem to understand that both of the above can be true. The parallel you draw to the internet revolution is apt; dot-coms were both a bubble and changed everything.

reply
upvoteby almosthere3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
it literally describes the gartnerhype cycle. this article is pointless, the only thing that matters is what survives it with over 1m users. AI will have billions of users when GHC is on the back end.
reply
upvoteby naravara3 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
I think a good analogy will be the way word processors changed printing. Suddenly anyone with access to a computer had the ability to do professional level editing and layout. Most of them didn’t have the taste or skills to use the tools to the fullest, but it still opened up a ton of possibilities that weren’t available before because it was never practical to hire an actual professional to do a poster for a dinky church bake sale before. But now, church bake sales can have pretty slick looking posters (and websites) depending on whether any of the volunteers cares enough to get.

The stuff LLMs will democratize will be a lot more impactful than nice posters for car wash fundraisers though. So in that sense it will be different, but I don’t think it will crack the market for proficient experts in the field in the same way photoshop didn’t destroy graphic design and CAD didn’t destroy drafting. It may get rid of the market for a lot of the second-tier bootcamp grad talent though, so I wouldn’t be getting into that right now if I could help it.

reply