August 9, 2026
Inbox drama on the doom train
I got an email about resistance
Writer gets fiery email on “resistance” and the comments go full popcorn mode
TLDR: A writer posted a heated email accusing him of being too passive about artificial intelligence, then defended his more cautious approach. Commenters were far less calm: some mocked his ego, others fought over whether resisting AI is wisdom or fear, and everyone seemed ready for a history-flavored meltdown.
A writer shared a very intense email from a reader who basically accused him of being too calm about the rise of artificial intelligence, saying that if he really believes big change is coming, he should either fight it or quit pretending to be helpless. The reader even dragged in Willy Wonka and future historians for maximum theatrical effect. The writer replied by comparing today’s software world to the Industrial Revolution, arguing that history is messy, panic is easy, and his real concern is helping confused workers deal with change.
But the real fireworks were in the comments, where readers treated the whole thing like a public trial. One brutally summed it up as the author getting called a hypocrite and then asking for applause for his comeback. Another pushed back hard on the idea that skepticism about artificial intelligence automatically makes someone a “Luddite,” saying that disliking one technology is not the same as hating progress in general. That sparked a deeper history fight, with one commenter insisting people throw around the word “Luddite” without understanding what it actually means, even linking a history explainer.
And then came the jokes. One commenter sneered, “This guy has an ego,” before proposing society just drift along until there’s an “AI Chernobyl,” dubbing it “The Apple strategy.” Another flipped the whole insult around and claimed AI users are the real Luddites because they want computers to do the thinking for them. In other words: the article asked whether to resist, but the comments answered with sarcasm, doom, memes, and a full-on identity crisis.
Key Points
- •The article republishes an email from William Murray criticizing the author’s recent writing about the future of software work.
- •Murray argues that if the author believes deep-thinking software jobs are ending, the appropriate responses are to leave the field or actively resist rather than accept the trend.
- •The email says the author has influence and is using it to express resignation to technological change instead of organizing opposition.
- •In reply, the author says programmers today resemble high-status craftspeople during the Industrial Revolution who were both threatened and empowered by automation.
- •The author cites the historical actions of the Luddites and the British crackdown on them to question whether resistance to automation is effective, regardless of later historical sympathy.