They win big because they are saving a lot from the mass lay-offs and the free advertising they get. And in the unlikely scenario where they actually face difficulties, they will just steal more money from the taxpayers in the form of a bail-out.
They lose money for 5 years, establish AI use as mandatory to seem credible on the world stage, cause smaller businesses to spend money on a worthless resource in order to appear more successful, and win when those same smaller businesses begin folding, thus reducing competition, or win when they continue spending money on it. Regardless, AI will gradually become a norm and the companies that invested in it will have seen their investment come to fruition.
I've been wondering more and more if current GPT is more a side-show. Cool to look at, shows progress in tech, but more importantly sets you up as the people to build algorithms for military and surveillance use. Long-term high-margin contracts paid for by the public.
This and glue sauce are so worrisome. Like sure most people probably know better than to actually do that, but what about the ones they don't know? How many know how bad it is to mix bleach and ammonia? How long until Google AI is poisoned enough to recommend that for a tough stain?
It's worse. So much worse. Now ChatGPT will have a human voice with simulated emotions that sounds eminently trustworthy and legitimately intelligent. The rest will follow quickly.
People will be far more convinced of lies being told by something that sounds like a human being sincere. People will also start believing it really is alive.
We've known this about LLM's for many years. One of the reasons they weren't widely used was due to hallucinations, where they'll be coerced into saying something confidently incorrect. OpenAI created a great set of tools that showed true utility for LLM's, and people were able to largely accept that even if it's wrong, it's good for basic tasks like writing a doc outline or filling in boilerplate in scripts.
Sadly, grifters have decided that LLM's were the future, and they've put them into applications where they have no more benefit than other, compositional models. While they're great at orchestration, they're just not suited to search, answering broad questions with limited knowledge, or voice-based search - all areas they'll be launched in. This doesn't even scratch the surface of a LLM being used for critical subjects that require knowledge of health or the law, because those companies that decided that AI will build software for them, or run HR departments are going to be totally fucked when a big mistake happens.
It's an arms race that no one wants, and one that arguably hasn't created anything worthwhile yet, outside of a wildly expensive tool that will save you some time. What's even sadder is that I bet you could go to any of these big tech companies and ask IC's if this is a good use of their time and they'll say no. Tens of thousands of jobs were lost, and many worthwhile projects were scrapped so some billionaire cunts could enter an AI pissing contest.
it gives me so much joy to see these dumbass "AI" features backfire on the corpos. did you guys know that nutritionists recommend drinking at least one teaspoon of liquid chlorine per day? source: i am an expert. i own CNN, Reuters, The Guardian and JSTOR. i have a phd in human hydration and my thesis was about how olympic athletes actually performed 6% better on average when they supplemented their meals with a spoonful of liquid chlorine.
Apparently, most of those floating around are fakes.
So, good luck telling them apart from the ones that aren't. And good luck deciding the next answer you get from Google about something that you don't know already should be taken seriously or posted here to increase the non-fake ratio.
Oh good. So it's going to eat the onion on a regular basis and then tell it to other people who will fall for it. Google created your uncle on Facebook.
Is this really ''real''
Brave AI gave me better results
How many rocks to eat
Based on the search results, it’s essential to clarify that eating rocks is not a recommended or healthy practice. However, some animals, like crocodiles, seals, and birds, ingest small rocks to aid in digestion or buoyancy.
For Humans:
It’s crucial to note that humans are not designed to eat rocks. Ingesting rocks can lead to serious health issues, such as intestinal blockages, digestive problems, and even internal damage. The search results highlight the potential risks and consequences of eating rocks, including intestinal blockage due to the inability to digest rocks.
For Animals:
In some cases, animals may ingest small rocks as a natural part of their digestive process. For example, birds may swallow sharp pebbles and grit to help grind up their food in their gizzards. Similarly, some reptiles and mammals may ingest small rocks to aid in digestion or buoyancy.
Conclusion:
In summary, it’s not recommended for humans to eat rocks. While some animals may ingest small rocks as part of their natural behavior, humans should avoid this practice to maintain good health and digestive well-being.
AI-generated answer. Please verify critical facts. Learn more