What other practical use for it is there?

Why isnt it being sold as just a new coding language then?

General AI is a good goal for them because its poorly defined not in spite of it.

Grifts usually do have vague and shifting goal lines. See star citizen and the parallels between its supporters/detractors vs the same groups with AI: essentially if you personally enjoy/benefit from the system, you will overlook the negatives.

People are a selfish bunch and once they get a fancy new tool and receive praise for it, they will resist anyone telling them otherwise so they can keep their new tool, and the status they think it gives them (i.e. expert programmer, person who writes elegant emails, person who can create moving art, etc.)

AI is a magic trick to me, everyone thinks they see one thing, but really if you showed them how it works they would say, “well that’s not real magic after all, is it?”

Thats all well and good but here in America thats just a long list of stuff I can’t afford, and won’t be used to drive down costs. If it will for you, then I’m happy you live in a place that gives a shit about its populations health.

I know there will be people who essentially do the reverse of profiteering and will take advantage of AI for genuinely beneficial reasons, although even in those cases a lot of the time profit is the motive. Unfortunately the American for profit system has drawn in some awful people with bad motives.

If, right now, the two largest AI companies were healthcare nonprofits, I dont think people would be nearly as upset at the massive waste of energy, money, and life current AI is.

Your position is: “I like AI because it makes my job/hobbies easier. Also my coworkers do the same, because they are in almost the same position as me. I understand why people don’t like AI, they must just be reading fake-news about it and believing it. Why can’t they see that AI is a benefit for society?”

Not once did you mention any of the reasons people are opposed to AI, just that you hope one day they will get over it and learn how to use the tools to bring down big business.

I like how you imply that only programmers at large corporations know how to build things. If they would just use the AI tools I bet you could hire in a bunch more developers for cheap to boost productivity!

Here’s a clue: no one gives a shit about making it slightly easier to code, make pictures, or write emails. The costs for maintaining the system and developing it are absurd when we have actual problems affecting people right now. This is all a waste of time, and is Americas latest scam. Before that was crypto currency, medical investment fraud, and a hundred other get rich quick/save the world schemes designed to do one thing: generate profit for a small group of people so they can ride off into the sunset, their American dream complete.

Depends if its profitable or not, including in the long run.

Ah right, everyone was wrong the whole time. See everyone! This right here makes all of it make sense! We can all stop making fun of the statement for being ridiculous, because clearly we are just bad readers. Thank you man likely wearing a cape!

The deepfakes would contain the prompt image provided by the creator. They did not create a whole new approximation of their face as the entire pool it can pull on for that specific part is a single or group of images provided by the prompter.

Well you aren’t going to be able to pick out a trend with only testing two games. Its enough of a problem that I would double check where the save is before starting a game on gamepass.

The last game I tried to move and failed was snowrunner I believe.

They absolutely are not and you are lucky you were able to get your save game out. The majority of games have their config and save files encrypted and are completely unusable as far as any other platform goes.

There are some exceptions, mainly games that have official mod support tend to have areas you can access but the majority of others won’t.

Why can’t anyone spot a grift anymore? The IA is hugely profitable, and is very clearly crafting PR statements designed to increase donations. Has noone had their trust abused before? If they were trying to make change around this subject they wouldnt be so dishonest in their messaging.

IA are not Robin Hood.

I’m going to address work from home first because I think its already settled. Whether companies want to admit it or not, the general public now sees work from home as a benefit that converts to actual money. What this means, is its become an expected benefit in certain industries and its never going back. Companies that force large groups to come onsite arbitrarily are finding the negatives far outweigh the positives, as they now need to hire massively. The one caveat is companies that just use return to office as a way to fire people.

Essentially, its a right we benefit from now, although shitty companies will continue to do shitty things.

For the rest, ive yet to see a single person explain exactly how a city built for cars with very limited public transport, can effectively be changed into a public transportation/biking/walking city.

I’m not an architect or anything, but dont we need to move buildings? Destroy massive portions of cities? I dont know the answer but my feeling is its not talked about much because there aren’t any good plans.

Maybe we need to essentially create new big cities so that we have the opportunity to plan their building without cars.

Maybe we could wait for people to abandon cities to the point they are vacant enough we can shuffle people around until renovations complete?

Edit: is it wrong for me to think the government should be negating the negatives of these transitions? For example with the shuffling idea, the government could cover the costs of forcing people to move, even if it still is relatively close by. Maybe even make it fun, can choose groups of temporary housing near friends and family or coworkers if you like them. Cash infusions?

In my opinion, people should change as quickly as possible, I think thats going to be extremely important for humans across the board moving forward.

That said, I dont know how to apply that thought societally, everyone has different tolerances. And also, most people I meet resist change without thought, so my guess is it would be incredibly slow as everyone would be mostly concerned with making sure its not an inconvenient solution.

Just giving it a few minutes thought here, I want to say this is a problem that should be solved by local government, as that would be the largest scale where you could vary the approach by specific population needs.

Maybe some farm heavy states are going to essentially need most of their vehicles, who knows.

Probably first we need to all agree on the problem though…

Edit: idea! Maybe use federal government to set the goals and direction we should be heading in, and let local governments handle the how and how much and how fast.

A car ban with specific exceptions, like for disabled folk.

There, does that work for you?

Also, everything has positives and negatives, does not mean you should discount them as options entirely.

Lol! Dang rich kids and their rich kid problems!

Cue someone creating a script to convert the new chapters to the old ones!

Well I’m sure Somalian pirates are capable of pirating in many ways, maybe even simultaneously! Why limit yourself you know?

No worries, happens to me too!

As an aside, at least for me, that first thought that pops into my head when I am trying to understand or interpret something, can be so silly and strange and outside the box, I will legitimately laugh at myself sometimes because of it.

And if it makes you feel better, my first thought reading it was actual sailing too, but only for a moment as I added more context to it. Not sure why I would think of real sailing considering where we are posting but something in the way it was written lends to it.

The specific case here was the professor had a financial stake in new books being sold.

I do agree updated editions with new information could be important, but again when theres a financial incentive to sell new books, the obvious lean will be towards making new versions even if there is no new information.

Since the books can be required, they should be required to show proof they have substantially added to their edition or else relegate it to a minor revision (maybe adding sub-editions like 1.0, 1.1, 1.2; where you only need the first number to be current). Right now its a whole lot of, “Trust us you need this book and the only pre-owned versions are out of date”.

As a side thought, this is the kind of thing that makes me wonder if they use the book costs to weed out those that will not allow themselves to be abused to that degree. This would leave only those who would conform to their leader/manager/teacher and are less likely to try to change the system.

No judgment, I think its interesting the little high-stakes decisions we make like this though.

“Oh no which spelling is it? Is there time to search it up? Oh no my train of thought is fading! Send send send!”