The problem is that even the specific things they’re good at, they don’t do well enough to justify spending actual money on. And when I say “actual money”, I’m not talking about the hilariously discounted prices AI companies are offering in an effort to capture an audience.

A bot that can do a job reasonably well, but still needs a human to check their work is, from an employment perspective, still an employee, just now with some very expensive helper software. And because of the inherent unreliability of LLMs, a problem that many top figures in the industry are finally admitting may never be solved, they will always need a human to check their work. And that human has to be competent enough to do the job without the AI, in order to figure out where and how it went wrong.

GenAI was supposed to put us all out of work, and maybe one day it will, but the current state of the technology isn’t remotely close to being good enough to do that. It turns out that while bots can very effectively look and sound like humans, they’re not remotely capable of thinking like humans, and that actually matters when your chatbot starts promising customers discounts that don’t actually exist, to name one real example. What was treated as being the last ten percent is actually looking more and more like ninety-nine percent of the work in terms of creating something that can effectively replace a human being.

(As an aside, I can’t help but feel that a big part of this epic faceplant arises from Silicon Valley fully ingesting the bullshit notion of “unskilled labour”. Turns out working the drive thru at McDonald’s is a more complicated job than people think, including McDonald’s themselves. We’ve so undervalued the skills of vast swathes of our population that we were easily deluded into thinking they could all be replaced by simple machines. While some of those tasks certainly can, and will, be automated, there are some human elements - especially in conflict resolution - that are really hard to replace)

“What are the chances…”

Approximately 100%.

That doesn’t mean that the slide will absolutely continue. There may be some fresh injection of hype that will push investor confidence back up, but right now the wind is definitely going out of the sails.

The core issue, as the Goldman - Sachs report notes, is that AI is currently being valued as a trillion dollar industry, but it has not remotely demonstrated the ability to solve a trillion dollar problem.

No one selling AI tools is able to demonstrate with confidence that they can be made reliable enough, or cheap enough, to truly replace the human element, and without that they will only ever be fun curiosities.

And that “cheap enough” part is critical. It is not only that GenAI is deeply unreliable, but also that it costs a truly staggering amount of money to operate (OpenAI are burning something like $10 billion a year). What’s the point in replacing an employee you pay $10 an hour to handle customer service issues with a bot that costs $5 for every reply it generates?

The reasonable way to approach this problem would have been to ask a follow up question, rather than bitching at someone for not answer in the exact format you required. You’re the beggar here, you get zero fucking say in how much or how little people choose to help you.

Fuck that’s cool. You lucky bastard.

We’re working on it, although for some parts of the world we will need to go through periods of increased snowfall to get there.

I taught myself Python in part by using ChatGPT. Which is to say, I coaxed it through the process of building my first app, while studying from various resources, and using the process of correcting its many mistakes as a way of guiding my studies. And I was only able to do this because I already had a decent grasp of many of the basics of coding. It was honestly an interesting learning approach; looking at bad code and figuring out why it’s bad really helps you to get those little “Aha” moments that make programming fun. But at the end of the day it only serves as a learning tool because it’s an engine for generating incompetent results.

ChatGPT, as a tool for creating software, absolutely sucks. It produces garbage code, and when it fails to produce something usable you need a strong understanding of what it’s doing to figure out where it went wrong. An experienced Python dev could have built in a day what took me and ChatGPT a couple of weeks. My excuse is that I was learning Python from scratch, and had never used an object oriented language before. It has no excuse.

Win or lose, this is a rugpull.

Hate to break it to you but this is not remotely close to being the first example of that happening.

Elementary is a very polished and user friendly linux distribution designed to familiar to MacOS users.

Yeah, I barely use the app, but this is a bullshit anti-consumer move that leaves me with zero reason to trust the company going forward.

Don’t try to be patronizing, you’re clearly not very good at it.

The net outflows on Twitter cost him about a billion a year. And there’s no golden parachute with Twitter, he’s not a CEO, he’s the sole owner.

Paying that debt requires him to come up with actual cash money, and Musk’s fortune is entirely in Tesla stock. The more of that stock he sells off to cover his Twitter losses, the more he damages the stock price, which shrinks his remaining fortune.

So yes, he absolutely does care. Twitter won’t bankrupt him, but it could definitely cause him some serious damage.

There’s no backend server to do the transcoding in this case. Kodi can access raw NFS/SMB file shares the same as accessing local storage, so it’s just reading the file over the network, the same as if you were playing it in VLC on your PC.

In the context of the lawsuit it’s definitely a valid thing to bring up, mostly because it helps you tell the story to the jury. But yeah, in practice it probably didn’t represent much of a hazard on its own (though it almost certainly wasn’t fire rated)

From what I can tell the lawsuit (which is against Ocean Gate, not Logitech) is really just calling out the controller as another example of willfully negligent behaviour.

You’re certainly correct that the actual cause of the failure was the carbon fibre hull. Just a terrible idea on so many levels. Carbon fibre, by its nature, is good under tension, not compression. It was never going to function well as a pressure vessel underwater.

There were a litany of terrible decisions made by Ocean Gate, such as not tethering the sub, because it was cheaper to launch it from a towed raft, but none of those bad decisions ultimately mattered once that pressure vessel failed. Those people were dead so fast that, to quote Scott Manley, “You go from being biology to being physics.”

Certain domain names are locally routed only. So if you use internal or local as a tld, you can just assign whatever names you want and your computer won’t go looking out on the internet for them. This means you and I can both have fileserver.local as an address on our respective network without conflicting. It’s the URI equivalent of 192.168.0.0/16.

“We decided not to advertise with this company because they sued us.”

Oh God, it only just occurred to me that that will be used as evidence.

They are. The FTC have already brought antitrust suits against three of the companies you just listed, and you can bet your ass they’re eyeing the rest.

Decades of neoliberalism doesn’t get undone in a single day. This is good news, and if America keeps putting competent people in power we’ll see more of it.

The company’s profit and loss sheets back that up—Tesla was spending heavily on GPUs from Nvidia rather than on new car lines, although that was followed by news that Musk has had many of those GPUs redirected to his social media company X.

So, let me get this straight… Tesla, a publicly owned company, of which Musk is an employee (and major shareholder) is buying GPUs to be used by Twitter/X, a privately held company of which Musk is the owner?

How is that not embezzlement?