American magic bean companies like Beanco, The Boston Bean Company, and Nvidia
Omg 🤣
Q: What does it take for $1 trillion of “wealth” to evaporate?
A: Say your state-sponsored thinking machine cost 1000 times less to develop.
Didn’t expect an onion article here.
Well… I thought it was relevant and humorous, and the rules don’t say the submissions have to be news. I might be stretching the definition of “discussions” but, figured it was worth a try :-)
Lol this article is very relevant to a lot of scam industries (essential oils, Earthing, 5G protection crystals, etc), but AI is objectively not one of them.
Regardless of how much of a bubble we’re in, regardless of how many bad ideas are being pushed to get VC funding or pump a stock, regardless of how unethical or distopian the tech is, AI objectively has value. It’s proving to be the most disruptive tech since the world wide web (which famously had a very similar bubble of bad ideas), so to call it “magic beans” is just wishful thinking at best.
Hey! Are you up to talking about your opinions on the value of current AI technology? I’m personally opposed due to how our society has chosen to organize itself, but I think the basic concept is interesting.
No opinions whatsoever. I believe I made that clear in my list of things to disregard when considering the objective reality of current AI tech.
Your estimation of what constitutes “objective reality” is in fact the opinion that you’re being asked about.
Yeah, I understand that you personally choose to disagree with reality, maybe you don’t like what reality has become, but unfortunately that doesn’t make it less real.
Twitter wasn’t profitable for its entire existence, it’s often a cesspool of ragebaiters, but clearly it has value because the second it was taken over, everyone insisted on continuing to use it, even choosing to migrate to various clones.
Uber and Lyft have been struggling to be profitable by effectively stealing from their drivers, but millions of people get off a plane and immediately use the services every day. It clearly has value.
Same for doordash and uber eats.
Your personal distaste for the business practices are valid, but they’re not relevant when discussing what the current state of the technology is. For many millions of people, chatgpt has (for better and worse) replaced traditional search engines. Something like 80% of students now regularly use AI for their homework. When Deepseek released, it immediately jumped to #1 on the Apple Store.
None of that is because they’re “magic beans” from which no value sprouts. Like it or not, people use AI all. the. time. for everything they can imagine. It objectively, undeniably has value. You can staunchly say pretend it doesn’t, but only if you are willingly blind to the voluntary usage patterns of hundreds of millions (possibly billions) of people every hour of every day.
And for the record, I am not in that group. I do not use any LLMs for anything currently, and if anything makes me use AI against my will, I will promptly uninstall it (pun intended).
Yeah, I understand that you personally choose to disagree with reality
You saying your opinion is objective reality does not make it so. I agree that LLMs have their (few, niche) uses, but you’re just being arrogant here.
I have made only factual statements. You can believe I’m arrogant for doing so, you can believe the preference of hundreds of millions of people is “niche” or “few” in number. Those are called opinions.
Which statements have I made that you believe to be my opinion?
These ones:
Yeah, I understand that you personally choose to disagree with reality, maybe you don’t like what reality has become, but unfortunately that doesn’t make it less real.
None of that is because they’re “magic beans” from which no value sprouts.
It objectively, undeniably has value. You can staunchly say pretend it doesn’t, but only if you are willingly blind to the voluntary usage patterns of hundreds of millions (possibly billions) of people every hour of every day.
And of course, the entirety of your first comment here.
Nothing of what you’ve stated has proven any of the above. Not that you care; you’ve decided you’re right, and therefore any opinion you hold must automatically be fact. Far as I can tell, you’re here to stroke your ego. Keep at it if you want, I guess — I’m not going to debate someone who only wants to hear themselves talk.
few niche uses? it has heaps of uses that aren’t niche at all
https://aussie.zone/post/16417192/14017352
perplexity.ai is a better search engine than any current ones and that’s about as mainstream a use as you can get
After all I’ve seen LLMs fail to do – including on the occasion that I’ve tried it – I’ve absolutely no interest in even bothering to click on those links.
Hey, I wanted to say I’m sorry for using ambiguous language there. My time studying history has profoundly affected me, so I tend to use “Opinion” to mean “What’s your understanding and reasoned analysis of X thing?”
The alternate implications slipped my mind when I posted. My bad!
I wanted to say thanks for sharing your thoughts and I think we’re actually on the same page with regards to current AI technology. I do recognize that a lot of people are interested in using it, and that they will continue to highly value the functionality it has. My objections to it are, of course, related to secondary concerns and problematic social issues- which I think you understand based on your post.
Earthing? How is that a scam?
I know for sure that bad earthing in my current residence has been creating significant problems for with appliances. Sometimes my UPS giving errors, which also, might be due to bad earthing.Hah, see that’s what I thought when various family members asked if I had heard about it. Turns out, if our electronics need grounding, so must our bodies…
our bodies
⏚⏚⏚
i have noticed that there are two competing narratives in the leftwingosphere:
A) ai is 100% slop garbage and a giant waste of electricity, pumping out garbage images with multiple hands and the text is nothing but hallucinations that can’t even count the number of r’s in “strawberry”
and at the same time
B) AI is going to take all our jobs and we will all be homeless and poor while tech billionaire CEOs turn us into slaves
Can’t say I’ve seen B anywhere. All I’ve seen is “tech billionaire CEOs want LLMs to take all our jobs and turn us into slaves,” not so much belief that they can. Perhaps you’re misinterpreting?
Yeah, I agree that in the long term those two sentiments are inconsistent, but in the short term we have to deal with allegedly misguided layoffs, and worse user experiences, which I think makes both fair to criticise. Maybe firing everyone and using slop AI will make your company go bankrupt in a few years, and that’s great; in the meantime, employees everywhere can rightfully complain about the slop and the jobs.
But yeah, I don’t think it’s fair to complain about how “inefficient” an early technology is and also call it “magic beans”.
Those are only conflicting statements if you believe that the market will not embrace worse products. It totally will so long as you have a group of people who lack the critical analysis skills to compare the products and arrive at the conclusion that the new one is worse.
It doesn’t help that the potential drivers of this action are massive conglomerates, so if a sweeping change comes from the top-down and is paired with a lot of propaganda (Marketing) then people will have no choice but to accept it as the standard.
I think that a lot of criticism about the actual quality of AI art is mixed, though. I feel like it has flaws, but I’ve seen arguments about flaws I don’t think are actually real problems with the technical quality.
Option A feels like wishful thinking or sour grapes or something to me. Community crossover with the humanities and fine arts is significant.
B is feeling a bit less imminent too; it just wasn’t clear a couple years ago that it will take more than raw compute. That being said, AGI is still bound to happen eventually, seeing as NGI did.
Fun fact: they are scarily compatible as long as the CEOs are not in their role thanks to meritocracy :)
That can’t be possible, if they fire all their workers and produce AI slop then we will simply start a new company with human workers that doesn’t.
This isn’t communism we can simply start a new business at any time for any reason, with or without AI
You seem to think, once again, that meritocracy is a thing.
It’s the exact same dynamic you are used to when it comes to yes-men and bootlickers.
Are they more productive? No. Do they get better paying job? Yes.
You can absolutely leave and fund a “good” company, good luck getting anywhere.
You can absolutely leave and fund a “good” company, good luck getting anywhere.
If the product has value then people will buy it*
Humans have always created jobs, we love em, can’t get enough of em, in a capitalist system if people want to buy human made goods and services and those systems are profitable then there will be jobs for those people
This isn’t a communist dictatorship where you will be forced to buy government sponsored AI produce and no other choice is given to you
*I assume the products would have little logos on them like “non-gmo, organic, human made and farmed fruits!” etc
Wouldn’t slop AI crash their motorcade or private jet pretty much immediately?
@CanadaPlus
If we step aside from cartoon logic for a second, we can still see manmade crucial tasks and a vast background of sloppy low quality production.Not that quality is highly sought after these days anyway.
No, it’d be cartoon logic if I said their motorcade should watch out for packs of dynamite and walls painted to look like more road. By contrast, broken stuff not working isn’t a hard case to make.
