OpenAI launched ChatGPT Agent on Thursday, its latest effort in the industry-wide pursuit to turn AI into a profitable enterprise—not just one that eats investors' billions. In its announcement blog, OpenAI says its Agent "can now do work for you using its own computer," but CEO Sam Altman warns that the rollout presents unpredictable risks.

[...]

OpenAI research lead Lisa Fulford told Wired that she used Agent to order "a lot of cupcakes," which took the tool about an hour, because she was very specific about the cupcakes.

top 54 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 67 points 1 year ago (1 child)

I think in some ways Generative AI is very emblematic of the current state of software development. Projects are approached from the outset with the driving question being, "how can we make money materialize out of thin air?" Not, "What kind of problems are we trying to solve?" Or, "Why would someone pay for this?"

The last several projects I've worked on have been solutions in search of a problem. Hyped up products that made executives see dollar signs but didn't actually produce any because they failed to provide any tangible value.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Comment resonates with my experience.

    Software project at work recently:

    We are going to launch a new offering to improve experience for customers.

    Ok, how?

    We are going to switch it to cloud model and charge annually instead of perpetual.

    Ok, that's for us, what about customer?

    We are going to analyze their accounts and present them with suggestions on other of our products and addons they haven't bought yet.

    Where is the customer improvement?

    We are going to discontinue supporting third party products and focus exclusively on customers that buy only from us.

    Ok, but we have support for third party products we don't even compete with?

    We are going to exclude those too, to focus on the market that is important.

    Ok, but at least you're going to provide equivalent capability as the product you are replacing?

    We are going to streamline the experience by offering only the core capabilities and discontinue extraneous features.

    Ok, but you think this will expand revenue, so you will afford to explain the service and support team and free up more time for developers to get requirements?

    We are in fact going to lay off and offshore all of it, including most of the customer contacts that barely kept the preceding product alive....

    Now after a while of this mess they also had like 96% availability with almost all of it unplanned outages, but that's not too bad because they have only like 6 or 7 customers anyways. There's emails running around asking why the product has failed, and the answer seems to be we need to kill more of our successful products to try to push customers into this mess.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 43 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    For anyone wondering what the fuck that title meant:

    OpenAI research lead Lisa Fulford told Wired that she used Agent to order "a lot of cupcakes," which took the tool about an hour, because she was very specific about the cupcakes.

    "It was easier than me doing it myself," Fulford said, "because I didn't want to do it."

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I'm still wondering. Like did it call up a bakery and place an order? Or go online? I know it didn't actually make the cupcakes itself.

    But I'm not sure that spending an hour trying to wrangle ChatGPT into getting your cupcakes is any faster or easier than placing the order yourself.

    The article also noticeably omits what happened after. Were the cupcakes made, and did they match what she wanted?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago

    I'm guessing it's the AI agent stuff. Which at the moment is literally just automating browsing through a website.

    Apparently there will be APIs to do this in the future. Ironically, AI wouldn't even be needed for that to be useful.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    The AI willed those cupcakes into existence, why don't you trust them?

    It's like the metaverse and NFT, you're not supposed to think about how it works. Instead you just need to believe reality will magically reorganize to make it work.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    With how terrible Google Search has become, I think I’m on Lisa’s side this time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    unfortunately any ai service is going to make things worse. right now we can discover and choose. with search and browsing dead, ai provider will shove the product giving them the highest cut aka most garbage or snake oil products.

    even today targeted advertising for poor people is filled with betting, lottery & poker game. similarly elder people are primarily shown ads of miracle cure for chronic illness and scammy religious crap.

    edit: switch to kagi. its paid but well worth it. searchXNG is also a good alternative if you have got time for hosting it urself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It really is a nightmare brewing. And they will hide behind excuses and keep it all opaque unless they are strongly regulated.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    regulated by who ? our senate and congress is filled by pimps who work for pedophiles like epstien and cheer genocider scum murdering children on daily basis. this include the “lesser evil” party. they had 4 years to release the pedo list or even try to slow down the genocide. they are not gonna give a fck about us working 3 jobs just to pay rent and live on prison food.

    sad reality is that after a certain threshold in a parasites-host dynamic, there is no other ending other than host dying because parasites has grown too big for it too feed. so unless another deadly parasite like cia or kgb luigi the 1%, the rest 99% are dead.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Kagi is all in on AI. Its the AI slop version of a search ranking algorithm

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Kagi has AI tools but they don't shove it down your throat. I don't understand what "all in on AI" means in this context. The company has said that they want to use AI like they use JavaScript, ie they want to use it as a tool but their product should work well without it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Okay but that’s not what easier means.

    Easier would be to call the bakery or spending 10 minutes browsing their website, asking to cast, and checking out.

    I don’t want to spend an hour on tasks that would normally take 10 minutes. My executive dysfunctions already make me good at doing that.

    This might be a revolutionary idea, but what if they helped me do that take an hour in 10 minutes?

    I’m just putting that idea out there totally for free in case any AI companies want to jump on that opportunity.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I use agents a lot and have written several MCP servers now, the tasks I automate aren't things like order cupcakes, it's mainly the glue between complex things.

    I still can't get Claude to nicely open a JIRA ticket for me, but I can get it to read through a sequence of connected documents and filter that into.

    I don't think agents are ready for the main event and these are some poor examples of their power.

    I'm not saying they won't improve, but using the right tool for the right job is critical. An hour to order cupcakes is silly even for an llm.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 54 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    So much for the internet. We somehow managed to turn one of humanity’s greatest achievements into a hateful echo chamber we use for warfare first and then into a blackbox where inefficient AI agents communicate with each other in the most inefficient way so the planet can cook us alive even faster. God forbid just calling up a bakery to order some cupcakes.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Companies will dump billions into AI to fuck everyone over but the transition to clean energy is always too expensive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    its easier to rule world that is in ruins than thriving one. They know they have to live on same planet as us yet still they dont seem to care if its going to shit. While so many rich people are dumb as bricks and dont deserve their wealth at all, there are also many who actually know what they are doing yet still they dont want to seriously work towards stopping the climate change, even though it wouldnt even reduce their wealth by that much in comparison.

    So only reasoning i can think of they want to have more complete control over everything, but they cant have it because world is too complicated and healthy. When civilizations start to fall, the rich will still have everything and with that they can start enforcing themselves on everyone.

    I dont have anything to base this on, its just my thought on the matter. It just feels like something billionaire would do, they demonstrate every day that they will not be content with anything and will not care about other people's suffering to get it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 74 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Man, remember all the custom cupcake bakers who were clamoring for an AI to take their craft?

    Me neither. Billionaires are a scourge upon society.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    CEO Sam Altman warns that the rollout presents unpredictable risks.

    But that doesn't prevent his profit motive from consuming untold amounts of electricity to shove this into your face. They know what they're doing. They know their product is used primarily to generate spam, and secondarily is designed to form addictive faux-relationships with their users.

    Burn in hell. Actually, given the direction this is all going, we will all be burning in hell within generations.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • So instead of working on fixing an existing problem for anybody, they're solving a new problem for nobody. Let them eat cupcakes, I guess.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    What’s more high stakes than a complicated cupcake order?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 8 points 1 year ago (17 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (14 children)

    It won't do that well. What you have to do is ask it to help you leverage your existing development skills in an unfamiliar domain. I used it to help me write a python program to authenticate, pull and filter data from a GCP firestore database and create an XLSX with summary and detail sheets.

    I've never used Python before in my life. It took me about 4 hours. Of course I've been doing that sort of thing in Java for many years. Turned out I wrote that faster in Python than I could in Java. Configuring the connection to that database in Python was so simple compared to Java.

    The stuff it wrote was sometimes incomplete or wrong in subtle ways, but I could see the bits that didn't make sense which helped me focus on those things and ask better questions to help me figure it out. I think the last hour was just me tweaking stuff by myself because I didn't need help with it by that point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    I needed about 30 minutes to do a python application from scratch that took linear JSON data files, merged them and presented them as a tree in a GUI.

    Before that I had barely done anything in python, basically could do a basic function declaration with a simple operation and nothing else. I even didn't have a lot of experience with UI at all.

    But like you I had experience with java and such, and those skills transfer. All it took was searching basic syntax/related code examples and required library imports. And I mean basic, search engine search, not AI answers.

    All I'm saying is, I really don't think AI is providing anything a lot more efficient than doing a good old crawl through API docs and stack overflow. So the fact it's using tremendous amounts of resources to maybe achieve a 10% efficiency boost is bothering me a lot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    If that was a 10% boost for you and you could've done it in 33 minutes without AI or experience, then my imposter syndrome has been right all along!

    I'd bet that would've taken me a few days and maybe buying a reference book and starting with hello world.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Did the AI gave you a starting point that would be very different from a bit of code someone submitted 10 years ago on stack exchange? Because in my experience, everything has already been asked and answered. This includes the most basic and naive stuff, and often I am very grateful for it, because, yeah, sometimes I need someone to guide me through the most basic stuff.

    In fact, the AI needed that exact knowledge base and a bunch more to exist in the first place. It's just vaguely competent at retrieving it.

    Anyway, I didn't say I had no experience, just the most minimal python experience. There are definitely a few quirks I had to learn (the data structures mostly), but for the rest is mostly finding the right method in the reference library, like you would in java.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Logically, you would be right. My practical experience is I waste a lot less time trying to google multiple explanations something because one by itself isn't helping me figure it out, writing bugged PoC test code and thinking something is broken, sorting through a bunch of things that haven't been relevant for 3 versions, etc.

    Of course the AI is trained on the same material we can an all find and read, but it does it orders of magnitude more quickly. The trade off is that it's not always right, but neither am I and neither are most sources on the internet right in all circumstances. But it's so fast and easy that I can iterate and evolve designs and understanding much more quickly than I could on my own.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    There’s also the fact that

    1. It’s only really good at this if you want it to generate Python, PowerShell, bash, or C++ code. Try any other language and it quickly assumes you’re using outdated and often incompatible libraries or doesn’t really understand how the language functions.
    2. at the end of it all, neither you nor the AI has learned anything new; you’ll have to put in the exact same amount of work the next time. If you do it yourself, then over time that 10% advantage goes away.

    Now, these things could both change over time, but humans are much more efficient to train than current state of the art probability sieves we call GenAI.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago

    It's only assuming if you aren't specific enough. And you do know their training is usually a year or two or 3 old. So they don't know about whatever new shit your trying to work with.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (7 children)

    Anyone who already knows another programming language but has never used python in their life can write a simple python app quickly, regardless

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    No you can't if you don't know the libraries. Python is entirely dependent on what libraries you include. If you don't know what you need you can't do shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

    No you can't if you don't know the libraries

    IDE.

    Python is entirely dependent on what libraries you include

    ??

    If you don't know what you need you can't do shit.

    IDE.

    The problems you propose in your comment are not only greatly exaggerated but already been solved for decades using conventional tools AND apply to literally all languages, having nothing at all to do with python. Good try! My statement holds true.

    Maybe your assumption is that you're in a cave writing code in pencil on paper, but that's not a typical working condition. If you have access to Claude to use as a crutch, then you have access to search for an available python library and read some "Getting Started" paragraphs.

    Seriously, if the only real value that AI provides is "you don't need to know the libraries you're using" 💀 that's not quite as strong of an argument as you think it is lmaooo "knowing the libraries" isn't exactly an existing challenge or software engineering problem that people struggle with...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    In a cave with pen and paper is nearly what I learned with. I learned with the run time, msdn, notepad and the cmd line. And yes you do end up in many situations where you simply don't have or can't use a full on ide everytime. Sounds like you've never really left your comfort zones and stuck your neck out in some tech you don't understand quite yet. Or worked in areas under strict software controls.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    It's telling that you're focused on personal assumptions instead of addressing the argument

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    What was the argument. Use an IDE which was the proposed answer for most of my objections. Which i did address.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Actually, nope! Claiming that you personally didn't learn with an IDE and that there are make-believe scenarios where one is not available is not actually addressing the argument.

    There really aren't any situations that make any sense at all where an IDE is not available. I've worked in literally the most strict and locked down environments in the world, and there is always approved software and tools to use... because duh! Of course there is, silly, work needs to get done. Unless you're talking about a coding 101 class or something academic and basic. Anyway, that's totally irrelevant regardless, because its PURE fantasy to have access to something like Claude and not have access to an IDE. So your argument is entirely flawed and invalid.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    It sounds like you are a much better developer than me, but to be fair I've had to teach myself everything using nothing but books and Google for thirty years. I've rarely had the luxury of working with someone who had the knowledge to mentor me, and never got a degree outside an AAS in electronics, so I've probably missed some critical skills along the way.

    In a lot of ways, the AI fills that role because it's better at answering questions than it is writing code. Earlier today it was explaining to me how a DOM selector could return a stale element in some cases in a failing end to end test. It took a few back and forths with some code examples before I really understood why the selectors might not be working.

    It also suggested some code changes that I had to push back on because, even though the code had errors, the errors weren't causing the problem. While building an array of validators I had awaited them, causing them to run serially instead of in parallel during Promise.all(). So you definitely have to know what you're doing to avoid having the AI waste your time (or at least more time than it takes to push back).

    I'm still trying to debug it, but without the AI, I'd be googling the fuck out of typescript syntax, JavaScript idiosyncrasies, and a whole testing framework I've never seen before.

    So...

    if the only real value that AI provides is "you don't need to know the libraries you're using"

    ...returns false.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    So now they're raiding We Bare Bears for ideas?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    I need an agent who would set up DevOps for me. Then robots would definitely be the ones working hard, not humans.

  • source
  • 28 comments in c/nottheonion@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 50 points 1 year ago (24 children)

    So it takes ChatGPT 10 minutes to an hour of servertime and the energy equivalent of a tank of gas or two to complete a simple task the user could have done in thirty seconds using their 40W brainmeats and a couple of pudgy fingers. That's just great. Good stuff, Altman. /s

  • source
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    But it will get better we promise please use AI. I swear you're going to love it we are going to replace all workers with agents, just use it, use AI. Please use AI. We are going to put AI into your taskbar use it. Just use AI. It will get better, might as well use AI now. Use AI now.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -12 points 1 year ago* (22 children)

    You're not wrong today. But this is exactly the basis of the critique of computers in the 50s. And you probably created this post using a mobile Internet connected computer that fits in your pocket.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    The first computers were astonishingly faster and more accurate than human calculation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Not for negative numbers floating point .... Just read the list man, no they were not. You're incorrect here.

    They were faster. Not more accurate.

    Just like AI.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Just to be clear, you're saying that ENIAC was just as prone to mathematical error as a guy doing long division on paper would have been?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago*

    Stop building straw men.

    I never claimed ENIAC was as error prone as a human; I cited its specific technical limits to refute your oversimplification.

    You're dodging my actual point by moving the goalposts. My whole point has been pretty clearly stated that today's complaints about AI's inefficiency sound exactly like the old complaints about the first computers.

    If you're going to keep employing logical fallacies and move goalposts to make an argument with me and waste my time, I'm just going to block you.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago* (16 children)

    Okay, down vote away. Lemmy has such an ignorant hate boner against AI.

    Computers were fucking trash in the 50s. Dumb tech enthusiasts all said the same shit people say about AI today: computers are unreliable, create more problems than they solve, are ham-fisted solutions to problems that require human interaction, etc. here are the HUGE problems computers had that we solved before the 70s.

    1. Signed Number Representation

    Problem: No standard way to represent negative numbers in binary.

    Solution: Two's complement became the standard.

    1. Error Detection & Correction

    Problem: Bit errors from unreliable hardware.

    Solution: Hamming codes, CRC, and other ECC methods.

    1. Floating Point Arithmetic

    Problem: Inconsistent and error-prone real number math.

    Solution: IEEE 754 standardized floating-point formats and behavior.

    1. Instruction Set Standardization

    Problem: Each computer had its own incompatible instruction set.

    Solution: Standardized ISAs like x86 and ARM became dominant.

    1. Memory Access and Management

    Problem: Memory was slow, small, and expensive.

    Solution: Virtual memory, caching, and paging systems.

    1. Efficient Algorithms

    Problem: Basic operations like sorting were inefficient.

    Solution: Research produced efficient algorithms (e.g., Quicksort, Dijkstra’s).

    1. Circuit Logic Design

    Problem: No formal approach to designing logic circuits.

    Solution: Boolean algebra, Karnaugh maps, and FSMs standardized design.

    1. Program Control Flow

    Problem: Programs used unstructured jumps and were hard to follow.

    Solution: Structured programming and control constructs (if, while, etc.).

    1. Character Encoding

    Problem: No standard way to represent letters or symbols.

    Solution: ASCII and later Unicode standardized text encoding.

    1. Programming Languages and Compilation

    Problem: Code was written in raw machine or assembly code.

    Solution: High-level languages and compilers made programming more accessible.

    Its just ignorant to be acting like any of the problems we face with AI won't be sorted just as they were with computers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    I agree on the point of solving a problem, it's just a matter of time, skill, and some luck. The biggest problem I see with AI right now is that it's marketed as something it's not. Which leads to a lot of the issues we have with "AI" aka LLMs put in places they shouldn't be. Surprisingly they do manage pretty well a lot of the time, but when they fail it's really bad. I.e., AI as sold is a remarkable illusion that wow, everyone has bought into even knowing full well it's not near perfect.

    The only thing that will "fix" current AI is true AGI development that would demonstrate the huge difference. AI/LLMs might be part of the path there, I don't know. It's not the real solution though, no matter how many small countries worth of energy we burn to generate answers.

    I say all this as an active casual experimenter with local LLMs. What they can do, and how they do it is amazing, but I also know what I have and it's not what I call AI, that term has been tainted again by marketers trying to cash in on ignorance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    In your opinion, what would LLM usage look like in thirty years? Would it's inefficiency be solved somehow? Would it's generalistic approach (even conditioned, e.g. culinary LLM trained on recipes), become better than existing specialized tools? Would LLM cease to be the 'natural' playground for big corporations alone as no private citizen can train a comparable model? Would it still persist as an unpredictable black box? Would there arrive and stay new professions dedicated to be AI operators, e.g. forming correct text queues to the LLM, designing them and probably even getting patents on them?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Lots of questions. Any of which I could only provide a very opinionated answer on. But to answer the bulk of your response here, I think we look to sociologists to predict the future of AI integrating into the division of labor.

    Basically, the division of labor will become more organic and complex, less rigid and mechanical.

    (i.e. nobody was paying bills by walking the neighborhood dogs in 1920. As technology increases, the division of labor becomes more organic/less mechanical.)

    So with this Is say that "Software Developer" is not a job in the future, but that statement carries more weight than it should. The software developer of today will be invaluable as a technician working with AI. In this example "software developer" is a mechanical division of labor where something in the future might be like "Development Strategist" as a more organic division of labor. As to what that looks like, your guess is as good as mine.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    A counter as I somewhat agree with you. Computers in that period weren't purchased and used by every company under the sun. It was a specialized system, mostly used by universities and research.

    AI is being shoved into every possible orifice of modern society.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Did you at any point in this raving lunacy of a rant stop to think that maybe, just maybe the reason people hate AI is because it's bad?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    It's like hating a shitty Black and Decker oscillating clipper, when it breaks, randomly cuts your thumb off, or fails to clip the weeniest of leaves from your hedge, when a pair of manual clippers work just fine.

    If it's a tool, it's a bad tool being marketed as the best and only tool you'll ever need again.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I'm genuinely curious, how often does spouting off random bullshit work for you? Nothing you listed backs up your argument that the problems around AI are a result of it's infancy and first cut implementations.

    Also, half of what you say is either untrue or disingenuous as all hell. "programs use unstructured jumps and were hard to follow"? What the fuck are you talking about? Please, find me a computer that didn't use something like a branch statement and didn't go in numerical sequence of instructions. I'll wait while you learn this so called "Instruction Set Standardization" of yours doesn't exist

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -2 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Cool, I am a well decorated expert in my field so hate all you want.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Are you saying cupcakes aren't high stake?

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    I read this article name out loud and the person I read it to literally said
    "Oh, is this The Onion?"

  • source
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago

    You all like to be so negative about this because you're scared. Truth is, he's making the right move. Another company would have released the same, but with different ethics in mind. He also makes sure to note that people shouldn't trust it with anything important.

    We all know that not everyone reads manuals and uses tech responsibly. That doesn't stop time, nor progression. Best that a non-profit company with at least somewhat positive ethics comes first with stuff like this, instead of for-profit capitalist leeches.

    Say all you want, there's arguments against OpenAI, for sure. But I'm not wrong.

  • source