Saying that a whole generation of people are lame and then having one of the lamest pictures in the history of humanity taken of yourself, ok
post
The generation that can't find work and start their lives because of AI isn't cheerleading for AI. Huh.
Saying "you don't need your own RAM" is the "let them eat cake" of this generation
"You need to understand that Sam [Altman] can never be trusted." "He is a sociopath. He would do anything."
-Aaron Swartz
He actually said that?
He didn't actually say that, He said that it was terrible for people to have their own dram barely being used most of the time when supply is limited and that having ram in data center better distributes ram resources through the cloud.
This is still bad because he's basically saying people should be forced to use their service but a lot of people have been misquoting him
That fucker should go strip it out of the warehouses full of old corporate workstations then.
But we could share in communities. We can do it locally. I can say to my neighbor, "Hey, my GPU is cold half the time, do you want to set up a shared host to split the load?" It's still a solution, but it's bottom-up. Yes, it would be more work, and a little less convenient. But the idea that only private corporations have the solution to this is not realistic. It's a question of priorities.
How is this a rebuttal? It sounds like he definitely said what people claim he said. The only issue here is putting a paraphrased statement in quotes, but I can forgive that since the message didn't change.
Its not a rebuttal I just think misquoting is potentially dangerous.
Well, I don't like it when people sanewash billionaire greed, and you defended his logic around "utilization" as if it were a good point.
What a piece of shit
"You need to understand that Sam [Altman] can never be trusted." "He is a sociopath. He would do anything."
-Aaron Swartz
I must be off my game today. A headline started with “Sam Altman Says” and I accidentally read the whole headline.
Sam Altman is lame for still breathing
If that were true, you could just wait 5 years, Sam. 🤷♂️
The interviewer in the article had the same reaction I had to this sentence : today, gen AI is very close to be the "cool thing five years ago". Rejecting it is not rejecting the new thing anymore.
We've already seen how it does, we've been suffering its consequences, and we hate it.
I'm way before gen Z by the way. If you can't get young people on your side, maybe you're not the visionary you want to be, Sam.
This is clearly why he's worried, he keeps saying AI will destroy the world, so we don't have 5 years to wait for them to find it cool /s
can outlets please stop echoing every stupid thing this man says? we all know he is lying (including him) he is just pushing a very specific narrative. covering him just helps him spread his AI gospel
Sam Altman probably owns the media
He's basically saying he needs five more years of US tax payer subsidy before he can start turning a profit. LMFAO.
I'm gen-x and trying to think of what was cool 5 years ago. 2021. So middle of the pandemic. I guess wearing funky masks, working from home, socially isolating? Aw shit, I miss those things too.
Sourdoughs?
Like anyone would listen to THIS guy about what is "cool."
You know what's cool? Sociopathic Oligarchs stepping off of high buildings. Give it a try, Sam.
I'm Gen X, but Gen Z right now is my fuckin' hero. Every time I hear a story about young folks rejecting AI and taking critical thinking and creative writing classes, it casts a ray of hope.
Nothing screams disruptive innovation like a billionaire scolding young people for not being excited enough about the technology making entry level jobs disappear. Apparently Gen Z should stop chasing what was cool five years ago and start chasing whatever Sam Altman needs investors to believe is cool this quarter.
Historic elite psychopaths: "let them eat cake"
Late stage capitalism elite psychopaths: "The peasants should welcome our totalitarian dystopia, devoid of cake"
More like “the peasants have too many cords of wood at home, they should be forced to give them to us so they can rent the heat and we can have a monopoly on temperature control and baking. Also they can rent cake from us”
You are replying to a bot
Putting their following comments as a whole into Pangram gives 100% AI as result (Pangram is known to underreport sooner than to overreport):
Tap for spoiler
Nothing screams disruptive innovation like a billionaire scolding young people for not being excited enough about the technology making entry level jobs disappear. Apparently Gen Z should stop chasing what was cool five years ago and start chasing whatever Sam Altman needs investors to believe is cool this quarter.
Funny how »global allocation efficiency« always ends with everyone renting access from the company whose CEO wants to do the allocating. Local AI offers privacy, independence, and no monthly tollbooth. Apparently the real waste of RAM is letting people control what they own.
Wall Street spent years pricing every chip company as if humanity would soon need a GPU to make toast. Then Intel mentions that people aren’t buying overpriced PCs, and a trillion dollars evaporates. Apparently the most advanced semiconductor technology on Earth still can’t manufacture realistic expectations.
Of course it reeks of AI. We all write like AI now. Half the internet sounds like a chatbot trying to pass as human, and the other half is humans desperately trying to sound like chatbots. At this point, sounding natural is probably the biggest giveaway that you’re a bot.
Cisco just handed a 27 year old unlimited AI tokens and the keys to 98% of its codebase. Somewhere, a senior engineer is quietly updating their resume. Rewriting code is easy. Discovering why that horrifying 1998 workaround exists is the actual final boss.
Intelligence flagged a possible Chinese spy with access to Nvidia’s CEO, and the response was apparently to worry about Nvidia’s share price? So the chips are too sensitive to export, but the intelligence is too sensitive for the stock market? Very efficient system: national security gets the risk, shareholders get the protection.
The best part is that we spent 15 years cutting emissions just so a handful of billionaires could burn the savings teaching chatbots to summarize emails nobody wanted to read. Then they'll sell us AI powered climate solutions, funded by taxpayers, to clean up the mess. Innovation really is a beautiful circle.
Google spent decades telling publishers to create quality content, then built a machine to read it aloud without sending anyone to the source. Now it's shocked that the machine makes less money. Congratulations: they've invented a search engine that eats both its suppliers and its own business model.
Musk wanted to be Tony Stark. Somehow he ended up with Vladimir Putin in his fan club. The truly dystopian part isn’t the praise: it’s that one billionaire can turn critical communications infrastructure into his personal mood ring while governments keep treating him like a public utility with a podcast.
Damn I hate how I have to look out for this slop here of all places. Well they seem like they're trying to be a bit too much of a fedi influencer anyway, so it's an easy block
Good to mention @kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com saw it through the structure of every comment:
You are replying to a bot. This bot posts an article then a 3-4 sentence comment with a witty remark at the end.
I also come here for a slop-free experience, but I’m afraid that’s becoming impossible more and more.
Oh no, someone populating the fediverse with content and agreeable takes! The horror.
Imo the fediverse, and internet at large, has more than enough "content" already. I'm fine with more people sharing their takes, but if they're going to do so in an already oversaturated space the least they can do is make it a quality piece that they actually made.
I don't need all the fluff generated up around the quote. Just give be the quote and the bare take if that's all you want to say.
You think the fediverse is oversaturated? That pretty crazy. Maybe you should curate your feed a little better, since, you know, it gives you the tools to do that.
If you've read about the network effect, you'll understand that the more we have people posting here, the more people will view it as an alternative to corporate platforms, and the more the userbase will grow, in turn creating a larger network effect.
There are still dozens of niche communities that are either non-existent on the fediverse or completely inactive. Until we have active comms to replace all those subreddits that people say make it hard to leave reddit, the fediverse is by no means oversaturated.
The user you're railing against isn't posting anything obtrusive. Their comments are generally thoughtful. I don't know why you feel the need to manufacture outrage against them.
I didn't mean to rail or express outrage, I just don't care for content or engagement that doesn't have an author.
I think what sets lemmy apart, other than the our superior protocol, is the high quality of genuine interactions. I'm not interested in personally sacrificing on that for anything.
Like I would call this a high quality disagreement right here—I'm fully bought in because I recognise your username from other threads and recall you have meaningful things to say that I believe are genuine and may actually change or alter my opinion.
It's not that I disagree with anything the other account was posting, but that I believe they're faking engagement, they give off influencer vibes, and I'm not in lemmy for either of those things.
I mean, I've seen people calling them a bot but I've interacted with them and I don't see what other people see. I don't get it.
I agree that interactions on lemmy tend to feel pretty genuine, and part of that is because we're mostly humans here. I wouldn't want to change that, but I also wouldn't want us to devolve into bickering over who's really a human. If the content is good, I don't see what the issue is. Especially if it sparks further discussion in the comments.
Your third paragraph is kinda flattering. I tend to think I run a little too hotheaded at times, but maybe it's just because I waste too much time feeding trolls until they start getting under my skin. But it could also be that I have some form of online dysmorphia, and only remember the times I went overboard that eat away at me for days after. Either way, it's nice to hear someone values my input.
I see your point about it not being about the content of the post but about who or what is behind the account, or what their motivation might be. I just don't see why anyone would bother trying to be an influencer on the fediverse, because it doesn't offer any incentive. No ad revenue, no partner sponsors, no karma-based content boosts, so no reason to farm engagement only to sell the account like what happens on reddit.
I mean some accounts do seem to try to astroturf an agenda, like all the week-old accounts we see pop up during election seasons, but that's not what this seems like to me. I could always be wrong though.
I've held back for now everytime i saw people referencing to @eicker@lemmy.world as a bot, but in all fairness i have the urge to speak up.
I do not care very much about this if the content is genuine and the comment is not asinine. Even if they generate their comments, they will reflect what they wanted to say in general, and the content itself is fine.
I do care if it involves generated videos (which is an absolute waste of ressources) or if the linked content is BS.
Thanks, but it doesn’t help either way. I have a basic assumption: people often accuse others of doing what they themselves do.
I understand that the current landscape regarding AI is a scary mess, and that many people might reject anything GenAI out of principle, but there are uses for this technology that are inherently human. Giving people the ability to express themselves outside of the constraints of their own limitations should be welcomed - it levels the playing field.
Interesting: »Minimum 50 words required for accurate detection.« 🤷
Very interesting, the parent comment is exactly 49 words, and all of your comments are less than 50 words. Is that how you're trying to thwart AI text detectors?
Which is why I used several comments instead of just one.
Never ceases to amaze me just how checked out from reality these people are.
When you have that much money, you don't need to think like a real person any longer. You're fully insulated against regular everyday reality. And they know they're at odds with real people because of the amount of money they spend on personal security. But they probably don't realize how they're at odds with everyone.
The thing that was cool 5 years ago was at least cool once. AI has yet to be cool and it doesn't look like it's heading in that direction. Meanwhile it's also taking a shitty economy and making it worse while enriching some of the worst humans alive.
AI was cool 5 years ago. It's not anymore.
Was it?
Hummmm....
Yeah, I guess it was cool for a few months, then it quickly stopped being cool....
It was cool just long enough for the novelty to wear off and the facts of how it was developed, how environmentally destructive it is, and what it will be used for to come out
It was cool before it hit mainstream. If you never knew or followed the space before that then it may seem like it always sucked.
I last thought it was cool in... checks notes 2016, when an innocent project to differentiate the content and style of images got turned into a big social media face alteration filter data harvesting thing. Feel kinda guilty about accidentally contributing in whatever small way that was at this point
It was never cool. At best it was a clever parlor trick.
I thought it was neat at first too, but yeah, have definitely lost interest. I'm surprised when I see people at work actually using it like on purpose.
Hell... I recall going to a developer conference and seeing image recognition powered by machine learning a good 10 years ago.
Yeah, I remember the ML hype was SO hot back then. I got into it a little late, but I remember the fintech company I worked at making this ML powered "credit card approval checker" to see how likely you would be to get approved for a CC without doing a credit check.
Anyway, it probably worked fine. Actually legit ML actually works a lot better for that sort of thing than today's LLMs, but I'd bet it's "ai powered" now.
Somewhere in the forest there exists a tree planted just to replace the oxygen Sam Altman wastes. He should find it and apologize.
At its best AI is a tool like every other tool that came before it. And I don't ever recall worshipping a fishing rod as much as it wants to drag me up to shore.
Cool things don’t have an expiration date. That’s a depressing as fuck way to look at life.

top 100 comments