Yes—and the fact that people now cite a punctuation mark as forensic evidence says a lot about the level of the discourse.

Fully agreed ✨

This is a very important and, frankly, very healthy development.

Why this matters:

• Boundaries are good ✅ Not every space, workflow, or community needs AI integration.

• Discernment is good 🧠 Saying “no” to a tool is not irrational. It is often a sign of standards, judgment, and maturity.

• Human value still matters 👥 Efficiency is not the same thing as meaning, quality, trust, or legitimacy.

In short:

I think this kind of pushback is not anti-technology. It is pro-boundary, pro-quality, and pro-human agency. Very good to see this being articulated so clearly. 👏🤖📌

If you want, I can generate a second version of this comment with even more obvious AI-style phrasing and formatting.

Same with Cuba right now. The US claims to be concerned about Cuba’s democratic deficits and human rights violations. All while ignoring their own democratic backsliding and ICE’s gestapo-like racial cleansing of the population.

I’m convinced that MAGA is attracting many people who live a rough life. Poorly educated, resentful, low income people whose attention is fixed on the next paycheck and the cost of groceries. Again and again, I see that many of them seem to view society as a zero sum game. Meaning “if those foreign looking people get punished now, I will surely be better off next month, right???”

The problem is systemic. I blame the chronic failure of political education across the country. Because of that, I do not expect meaningful political change unless it is triggered by some kind of major rupture, crash, or shock.