It reminds of those stupid calculations that the music industry did back in the old days of Napster and other P2P sharing about how much money they lose.
When in actuality, I suspect that an actuary or accountant can estimate that this open sourcing of a 20+ year old game probably brings in new revenue in terms of consumers being interested in the franchise.
What are the chances that these Athletic articles are agent plants? I haven’t taken/read the Athletic for years. Their articles, at first, seemed interesting and novel. Then it just seemed that every article was a planted puff piece.
I haven’t read the replies but there was a very interesting episode by Derek Thomson’s Plain English podcast which I found incredibly interesting.
Derek made the conjecture that we were on a cusp of a big paradigm shift in the Internet.
For the last 20 years, it was essentially about building a consumer basis. So companies like Netflix and Facebook and Amazon did not care about current profits. The point was to just get consumers, drive out the competition, and commandeer the monopoly.
Now and especially post Covid companies like Twitter are realising that this isn’t going to work. The next movement is going to all be about paying models. This is what we’re seeing with Twitter. This is what we’re seeing with OnlyFans or Patreon.
So in light of the above comments, none of this is surprising. The next era will be about paid models of the internet.
I need to find that episode as it was extremely prophetic. It might have potentially been this one https://open.spotify.com/episode/2zRha9y46btKdAfwfHpvQ5?si=_jkP3iX7TXOesHLsoY9Vxw
Eh, I think a lot of it is who you hang around with.
Both at home and at work, nobody in my community cares. We have people using Linux, Mac, and PC. Android and iPhone.
Is this a popularity thing in high school?
Can you link an example of what you mean by the problems in image generation models?
Hi, it’s late and just a quick response.
First off, I’m sorry for the tone in my original OP. I think I, too, forget that Lemmy more than Reddit is run my volunteers. So on Reddit it’s fine to go off on a rant about nameless people. But it’s different here. We appreciate all your work.
Second, in terms of a future format that would work, is it possible to have a daily pinned thread with the content? On r/nba what happened for post game threads was that there was a single post but with the bot establishing comments corresponding to each item. Then people can comment within each sub comment.
Yes, you’re right. Sorry I should have better acknowledged the efforts of the mods and developers.
Sorry my tone was off.
It’s just that I fear that realisation may not filter down.
You honestly see it a lot in industry. Companies pay $$$ for things that don’t really produce results. Or what they consider to be “results” changes. There are plenty of examples of lowering standards and lowering quality in virtually every industry. The idea that people will realise the trap of AI and reverse is not something I’m enthusiastic about.
In many ways AI is like pseudoscience. It’s a black box. Things like machine learning don’t tell you “why” it works. It’s just a black box. ChatGPT is just linear regression on language models.
So the claim that “good science” prevails is patently false. We live in the era of progressive scientific education and yet everywhere we go there is distrust in science, scientific method, critical thinking, etc.
Do people really think that the average Joe is going to “wake up” to the limitations of AI? I fear not.
Part of the problem with AI is that it requires significant skill to understand where AI goes wrong.
As a basic example, get a language model like ChatGPT to edit writing. It can go very wrong, removing the wrong words, changing the tone, and making mistakes that an unlearned person does not understand. I’ve had foreign students use AI to write letters or responses and often the tone is all off. That’s one thing but the student doesn’t understand that they’ve written a weird letter. Same goes with grammar checking.
This sets up a dangerous scenario where, to diagnose the results, you need to already have a deep understanding. This is in contrast to non-AI language checkers that are simpler to understand.
Moreover as you can imagine the danger is that the people who are making decisions about hiring and restructuring may not understand this issue.
Thanks. Let me read it a bit more closely.
Interesting. Maybe I don’t know as much as I thought. Let me do some more reading…
God. I don’t even know what to say.
The article reads so strange…like describing a cult.