The nature of the invention is for people to relieve themselves of the burden of having to use their minds. And while there will be exceptions, (including, I'm sure you: the person reading this comment,) the vast majority of people are hungry to use AI in that spirit of being able to be lazy.

Lazy can be a good thing. Since time and attention are finite and not fungible, it allows you to do something else. There's a reason we're all too lazy to do long arithmetic with pen and paper, instead relieving the burden of using our minds by outsourcing to spreadsheets and calculators. Not only does it allow us to think at a higher level of abstraction, but it also means we can take our kids to the park more often.

https://thethreevirtues.com paraphrases something Larry Wall wrote in Programming Perl:

> If we’re going to talk about good software design, we have to talk about Laziness, Impatience, and Hubris, the basis of good software design.

sourced from https://bcantrill.dtrace.org/2026/04/12/the-peril-of-lazines..., where Bryan Cantrill makes the point that:

> The problem is that LLMs inherently lack the virtue of laziness. Work costs nothing to an LLM. LLMs do not feel a need to optimize for their own (or anyone’s) future time, and will happily dump more and more onto a layercake of garbage.

which I think is interesting, albeit somewhat tangential to the current discussion.

I don't believe this is true.

Remember the "ChatGPT lazy winter" 2 years ago? (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=1&prefix=true&que... )

That was truly "lazy", as in "yo... I'm not interested in doing this so I'll half-ass it or just tell someone else to do it".

The kind of "lazy" that is mentioned in your quote is "I don't want to add work to future me's life". I don't think "lazy" is the right word for it.

Yeah, it's like declaring self driving safe because people are told to remain alert with their hands on the wheel, ready to take over in an instant. It's a charade.

You have no obligation to agree with them, but after all this time I don't know how someone on either side could be ignorant of what the other side's main arguments are.

A calculator does replace our ability to do math in a certain sense.

At the grocery store there's countless (no pun) opportunities to do math in the sense of comparing prices and calculating unit costs etc, but most people can't do that math easily in their head because the calculator has made that skill less important.

But people also don't pull out the calculator repeatedly to do this in the grocery store, so the math just doesn't get done.

"Why don't they make the whole plane out of the black box???"

I retired due to not only AI, but other reasons this industry has become something I don't like.

I'm fortunate with regards to the timing and being able to do it, but if I could have a job like the one I had ten years ago I'd still be working.

It's a bummer that the rest of us have no choice but to live in the world created by the tyranny of the docile.

What a community of temporarily embarrassed unicorns we have here.

Has a company ever had a greater fiduciary incentive not to finish and release their game?

Will $250 million and 20 wizards squeeze out an MVP in 9 months for MacBook Neo?

Use AI agentic coding amplifier.

The point is that the long-ongoing effort to weaken regulation leads to events like this as predicted, and further steps in that direction are powerfully incompetent.