5·
48 minutes agoNo, the act of a company shoving something bad down people’s throats does not prove it’s what they wanted. You should know this.
We have polls that have calculated people’s sentiment. They are sick of AI .
- 0 Posts
- 17 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: June 23rd, 2025
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
This comment is unnecessarily dismissive and unhelpful.
If people don’t care, then they won’t care if it’s gone either. And that’s the better option.
Exactly my thoughts.
DuckDuckGo enjoys default search engine status on a lot of browsers, and many of them make it difficult to set a custom one. Especially mobile browsers, and apparently even Safari makes it a pain.
DuckDuckGo should apply this lesson to their search engine!
Difficult when YouTube has monopoly power over online video distribution.
And more government regulation. These companies constantly cry for universal “guardrails” on AI - a thing that is too nebulous to define, but only these companies have the cash and lawyers to claim they do.
It actually makes perfect sense to do this if your goal is corporate capture of the market.
From another article :
On one side are leading A.I. companies like Anthropic and OpenAI, which claim that some A.I. models are too dangerous to be developed in the open and must be tightly controlled — by businesses like themselves — for safety.
On one side are leading A.I. companies like Anthropic and OpenAI, which claim that some A.I. models are too dangerous to be developed in the open and must be tightly controlled — by businesses like themselves — for safety.
And there’s the reason these giant companies keep saying their products are dangerous over and over.
Surprisingly good writing from the New York Times, it must have escaped their editorial board by mistake. As a bonus, they included a picture of what the CEO of Nvidia would look like if he was yeeted into space:
Sounds more like the Indian government wanted an apology for Facebook removing a state propaganda video, and added the other apology requirement for PR.
Earlier on Wednesday, Meta representatives also met IT secretary S Krishnan, who gave them three days to apologise for removing PM Narendra Modi’s video on exam reforms for five hours and for hosting sex abuse content on its platforms.
One of those things is not like the others
If you’re using an online chatbot, there’s a roughly a 0% chance that there’s any encryption keeping your conversations provably unreadable. This part of the conclusion is inevitable.
Still very glad there was an article with insider information though, because exposure like this is important.
I’m getting a little suspicious of the quality of this source. If you’re looking for the data center map, you’ll find it here:
What’s lost? I can’t think of anything.
Words are meant to convey meaning, and I bet you would lose a lot of non-technical people if you tried to explain the intricacies of what makes large language models worse than content recommendation systems, and doing this would be redundant for technical users.
So Corey can safely use the two words interchangeably and communicate with technical and non-technical alike.
went outside of what the AI tools were prompted to do.
Are we supposed to be shocked that a bot completed a task using a method that wasn’t in the prompt?
You might as well ask it to generate a short story and act surprised the letter E is found throughout it.
I remember a candidate talking about shooting a person in public and still winning, and he did. Call this a hot take, but I’d rather my politicians brag about shooting cheap surveillance tech than a living being
The article (Hank Green understanding himself) and the comment I was responding to (Hank Green misleading people about AI) are two similar different topics that can and should be judged separately.
I was responding to the person who said he was generally trustworthy about the topic in general, with what I think is a significant counterexample.
His recent history puts him at the bottom of the list of people I would trust regarding AI.
That’s not how capitalism works. If you genuinely believe in the Invisible Hand Of The Market, you shouldn’t.
And you should know better: just days ago , you were telling people capitalism, not AI, was the real villain, which makes your tone here come across as trollish.