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.
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”
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
So you’re mixing different answers together and hoping for a valid result? It’s just as well that the top universities have now given up on this witch-hunt.
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.
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.
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:
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.
Interesting: »Minimum 50 words required for accurate detection.« 🤷
Which is why I used several comments instead of just one.
So you’re mixing different answers together and hoping for a valid result? It’s just as well that the top universities have now given up on this witch-hunt.
Are you sure?
Hey weird question, are you actually a person?
I struggle to think of a less “cool” person than Altman.
/thread