The article is also full of bullshit and it gets basic history wrong. The agreement was never made, but to the extent it exists anyway, it was never supposed to be about a monopoly that’s destroying shit. Once upon a time, not even very long ago, there were competing search engines.

I know tech writers want to write stories that sound fancy, but if they don’t know the facts and the history then they need to find someone to proofread their work more carefully.

Well no, it’s not, because they have multiple monopolies. So we should blame them and blame government for not stopping them.

You’re straw manning. Please don’t.

Recognizing that violence has in fact “been the answer” to various circumstances in the past, and will be in the future, is different from saying everyone should pick up a gun today.

Violence is never the answer … if you ignore all of human history, yes. Sadly, it often has been, though.

Historically you are wrong, though. Mixed pressure has value and can be effective… But surely you know that, right?

Obviously the situations are different. We all know that. The point is that it’s hypocritical of a company to say hey, let’s ask our employees to do more by throwing AI at them, and then getting pissed off when potential employees do the same thing.

Although I think it’s more funny than anything else. The company found out that people are gaming the system, which means they have a really shitty system, and rather than change how they interview people or what types of questions they ask, they’re just acting obstinate.

I think we’ve seen enough changes in social media platforms over the past few decades to say that your claim is true until it’s not. As payments to content creators fall, and as garbage postings increase, the actual value to the average user of the site is clearly decreasing. So we’ll see how long YouTube is relevant.

So you’re saying that other options do exist but some companies don’t want to use them because Microsoft is very popular, which is kind of a circular thing, and I understand, but it’s a sign of laziness, not quality.

I think he’s trying to bait people into threatening his life, so that he can send people out to their houses and arrest them. What he doesn’t realize is that most people are smarter than that, and they won’t talk, they will simply act as necessary in order to defend themselves.

Many people in the world, they don’t know the difference between an expert system and an LLM. Or, to phrase it a different way, many people think that AI is equivalent to generative AI.

I think that’s largely a result of marketing bullshit and terrible reporting. Of course it would be good if people could educate themselves, but to some degree we expect that the newspaper won’t totally fail us, and then when it does, people just don’t realize they got played.

On a personal note, I’m a teacher, and some of my colleagues are furious that our students are using grammar checkers because they think grammar checkers are AI, and they think grammar checkers were invented in the last 3 years. It’s really wild because some of these colleagues are otherwise smart people who I’m certain have personal experience with Microsoft Word 20 years ago, but they’ve blocked it out of their mind, because somehow they’re afraid that all AI is evil.

Now is the worst time to try to enter the field. We need to see the AI bubble burst much more spectacularly, and only then might it be more reasonable. You certainly don’t want to try to get into a field when you have a lot of other choices when that field is already flooded with all of these people who have been laid off, combined with the increased availability of programmers in other countries, knowing that at the moment many domestic programmers are not smart enough to form strong unions to protect their own jobs.

I’m not sure this is any more humiliating than the original tantrum was, but because neither of them believes a word of anything they say anyway, nobody really cared. When you live your life in a narcissistic bubble, you never had friends and you never will have any, and no apologies you make or accept have any meaning.

I have to quibble with you, because you used the term “AI” instead of actually specifying what technology would make sense.

As we have seen in the last 2 years, people who speak in general terms on this topic are almost always selling us snake oil. If they had a specific model or computer program that they thought was going to be useful because it fit a specific need in a certain way, they would have said that, but they didn’t.

To be clear, the DNC is fighting against its constituents. This is Washington politicians and funders vs. the people. Sad to say, Washington is winning.

As Trump has shown us quite clearly, it doesn’t really matter what the Supreme Court says.

One of the problems that the major news outlets have is that they repeat each other. It’s not merely an issue of AI compiling news stories, but that on top of the fact that all of these newspapers are doing hardly any research. For example, if you live in a town that’s not too large, there might only be one local paper, and they might send out reporters to local events. Obviously you would then go to that newspaper if you wanted to learn about local events, because they are adding explicit value.

But if you’re trying to read about national politics, a lot of the information is going to be the same in a lot of the newspapers. Which means nobody cares about the newspaper itself. And this is a creation of the newspaper’s own decision making over the past few decades.

Yeah the whole warning reads like bullshit. We already know that Trump supporters, and probably people inside the FBI, will join in protests and commit acts of violence. This is an old tactic, it’s been around for decades, and it will always be used whenever people are having large political gatherings. You cannot avoid it.

So what’s the alternative? Not ever protest? That’s a stupid idea. And the author knows it stupid, which is why they didn’t say it, and they just ignored the entire topic. Which means they are trying to manipulate people and we should ignore them because they are untrustworthy.

Of course we knew that was going to happen. That’s the whole point.

Yes of course they are at the limit, and because they poisoned the internet with generative bullshit, they can’t scrape it and expect improvement, but they are still scraping it, so they’re poisoning themselves.

The end of the article has classic snake oil trash. The idea that newer AI could be trained to think similar to how humans think. Yes, great, you know scientists have been working on that for decades. Good luck succeeding where nobody else did. There’s a reason that so-called weak AI or so-called expert systems are the ones that we all remember as having lasted for decades.

We agree that taking money from them would in fact take money from them. Want a cookie?