Look I agree with you at a certain level, maybe it can't emulate deep conversations about big topics (maybe it can, I haven't seen an attempt...), but a vast vast majority of podcasts and radio shows are just like this: shallow and incredibly simplified with no more than a nod to the underlying concepts. 70% personality, 20% dumb analogies that the producer thought up in thirty minutes, and <10% actually communicating the material is standard fare for normie podcasts, sadly.
Honestly, given the personalization maybe it's a net improvement.
Kind of feels like looking at an overflowing landfill and thinking "I wonder if we can invent a robot that just generates new trash directly into the landfill".
This holier than thou attitude that crops up in these threads is so annoying, as if people wanting to casually enjoy a mediocre podcast or radio show on the 1 hour commute to their shitty job is a crime.
I don’t think anyone cares about other people’s cheap pleasures. What people do care about is the displacement of quality and craft. For instance, you could say the same thing about the state of the web - say when searching for recipes. Maybe some people like the ads, the consent forms, the backstories? Why so purist? Isn’t it nice with a bit of scrolling and getting in the mood for cooking with a bit of SEO?
Defending craftsmen and attention to detail is not just about purism or gatekeeping. I appreciate people who care, even in fields I don’t personally care about (yet?). The professor who annoyingly insists on making sure every student “really gets it”, or the woodworker who is adamant about what joints are superior, or the kernel hacker who maintains rigor in face of hundreds of feature requests. The integrity of professionals can make or break institutions.
With AI reducing the effort to create garbage to the point of commoditization, people have a right, and arguably even an obligation, to be concerned. Remember, tech doesn’t follow potential, it follows incentive.
Right. Similarly, I criticize the people who worked to make cigarettes more addictive, fast food more 'craveable', freemium games more appealing to whales, gambling more attractive to problem gamblers, etc. but not people who smoke, eat fast food, play freemium games, or gamble. That would be deeply hypocritical.
I'm not criticizing the people who consume garbage, but the people who are enthusiastic about opening new markets in garbage. People should strive to do good, worthwhile things with their lives.
Honestly, given the personalization maybe it's a net improvement.