This is a very 2023 take, and definitely completely stale, but I appreciate you may not have used it recently for obvious reasons.
Its not impossible for it to be wrong but its rare now. Still matters, but if you’re using it as your only reference point that’s on you.
Think of it more like being able to Google more complex sentences and not having to piece the answer together from reading through several different links and thats where its at atm imo.
The same thing has been happening in music production for the last few decades.
Its gotten easier and easier to make music, so the market is flooded and the average quality is lower.
But at the same time I would say there is also more music in the good tiers than there used to be. Certainly the variety has exploded.
What id say is that in neither case is it really a problem if its in an ecosystem that already has some form of rating system.
Shit apps existed before AI, and they fell into oblivion with 1 star ratings. The same will continue to apply moving forward.
You shouldn’t, it got the point across nicely.
Imo this is the immediate threat and the ai overlord or apocalypse (hyperbole, but not by much), is the slightly further out threat.
For all its faults, I cant help but worry Westworld got it right with the impenetrable bus sized ai brain running a flashy but fascist society from behind the scenes.
Id say maybe the ai wont actually be that capable, but evil people + slightly less capable ai could still achieve the same thing.
Pick your battles, no artists were harmed in the making of this mockery.
Most important step is to decide exactly where you want to draw the line.
Tbf odds are usually in favour of playing it safe, big spiralling scandals are the edge cases.
It is better to stand something from a moral point of view though, for sure.
Tbf the social media handle thing was to stop the girls just using it to get follows on their Instagram without engaging, it was a valid change imo.
You can still share it in the chats.
They are commodified attraction though for sure, but im sleeping next to someone I met on there a few years ago so they’re not all bad.
Corsodyl mouthwash, according to my dentist, is not supposed to be used every day because it can permanently alter your sense of taste. Corsodyl specifically.
Thats only 1 dentist though you’d have to ask the other 9 to know for sure.
Unlikely, most gamers are kids, most kids are totally agnostic to anything beyond the consumption of games.
Is that good or bad now.
I mean people play what they enjoy and not everybody cares about chasing frames.
Denuvo making games run worse is fucking garbage, but two things can be true at once.
You started by saying they produce the issues, but are now explaining what I said above, that they are a product of upstream social issues.
Is this worth discussing.
Its already happening but the bigger accelerations (large amounts of space all affected at once) are projected between 2040 and 2060.
Usually id agree but im not sure that really applies here.
You’re confused, those things are the outputs out late-stage capitalism.
Arguing against something I didn’t say. I never claimed companies “by default make good decisions.” I said thousands of independent companies and individuals repeatedly choosing to pay for a tool is reasonable evidence that it provides some value to them. That’s not some corporate infallibility, it’s revealed preference.
Your personal observations are anecdotes. If your claim is that LLMs are far more often harmful than useful, support it?
Then we’ve narrowed the disagreement quite a bit. You accept that LLMs can be used effectively, you’re just asserting that they’re misused far more often than not.
But both that and “anyone with eyes can see thousands of companies are wasting their money” are still just restating your conclusion baselessly.
Like i say, its value is in explaining something at exactly the level someone needs, answering follow-up questions, rephrasing things they don’t understand, giving examples, and helping them work through a topic interactively. They can then verify anything factual against primary or reputable sources. If you think the internet as a whole is now disreputable as a source then throw your phone into the ocean a get mashing up some bug paste no?
My main point is that “it can sometimes be confidently wrong” is a reason to verify it, not really an argument that it can’t be a useful learning tool.
The same distinction applies to search engines,and always has - finding information and establishing its accuracy are separate steps.
For the record, im not a stan, these things are owned by lunatics, but there’s no gain in pretending the product is worse than it is.
E: Also Googles ai overview is way weaker than shit like claud and gpt are right now, but your take makes complete sense with the context that thats what you’re measuring against. That is wank, no argument here.