wut
The line I've seen on AI boils down to this. AI won't meet human economic potential. But it will run cheaper
citation needed
arguing-from-existence of expert systems (which were the fantasy in the previous wave)
you probably don’t know this, but this post is so much funnier than you probably meant it
and it (probably) still won’t save you
alert alert we've got of one of them on the doorstep
my heuristic: I can understand a shitty past giving crescent to bad reactions, but the moment you start choosing bad things with current-era things I rapidly start losing grace and patience
(and yeah I know there's a continuum of stuff between A and B, but anyone showing up in a fucking news article of this shape is generally well past accident)
holy hell that inner is all kinds of past-even-wrong
is there some kind of idiocy gdq rankweekend event that I missed the announcement for?
I heard it was the same 50 parties, over and over
(or, well, the same party, x50...)
all hail the hockey stick may we forever outspend all competition and reap the rewards of a ravaged market we solely control
also series potential in there
Surprisingly (not), a sexbot!
But the move has some observers — including Musk himself — asking: How could this possibly be legal?
Because the nonprofit is there to represent the public, this would effectively mean shifting billions away from people like you and me. As some are noting, it feels a lot like theft.
it continues to be astounding how gullible some people can be (/choose to stay?)
I've been playing with "mass averaging synthesis machines", variations on "automated plagiarism", "content theftwashing systems"
still undecided tho