You’re probably right, but I’d also bet some things that we’re about to sweep aside will turn out to have been necessities and we’ll find it very difficult to bring them back.

So the value is in those who where actually kept outside by the gatekeepers. Those that can use the new tools and are no longer kept at bay by those that need artificial moats. The very same innovation that creeps to the front of society in a war, is going to be liberated. I toast to that.

What is possible as ground-truth, if the "tarbabies" of society get sidelined can be seen in Ukraine.

Is that your way of saying: I don't care? Because it sounds are if you're relativizing the problems to the level where you don't have to.

You don't specify what you think "no longer matters." And so there's no way to judge what you think is the impact.

> My bet: a lot of the things we used to do were habit, ceremony and gatekeeping much more than being necessities.

Yeah, right. "I've got a calculator, so we no longer need to learn arithmetic." It's the way of the ostrich.

I find that I'm much more tolerant of bad spelling and terrible punctuation because I know that a human being wrote it in the end. It's kind of hilarious that a sign of poor quality is now a sign of passion if not quality now.

Really depends on how the resource wars pan out. If inference continues to get monopolized and the monopolists do a rug pull in terms of availability of AI tools, the old ways will still matter.

When these things no longer matter, who will that benefit and who will be disadvantaged? What will the costs or net benefits to society be? Disruption can be good or bad, or often a mix. It's hard to say now whether social media was a net benefit, but it has definitely been disruptive.

>It’s a going to be a shock to everyone..

Not to everyone though...