I asked Perplexity, and it first had the question incorrect indeed.
Then I said that it was not what I asked, and then it gave the correct answer:
“You’re right to push on the wording; as asked, 20 pounds of gold is heavier than 20 feathers.”
Even if LLMs were profitable, it’s not going to be better at talking to LLMs than humans are.
LLMs don’t need to be better. They just need to be more profitable. And wages are very expensive. Doesn’t matter if they lose a couple of customers when they can reduce cost.
It is all part of the enshittification of the company and for the enrichment of the shareholders.
It makes sense for the tech companies to be rushing AI development because they want to be the only one people use. They want to be the Amazon of AI.
A ton of tech companies operate like that. They pump massive investments into projects because they see a future where they have the monopoly and will get their investments out a hundred fold.
The users should be a lot more wary though.
Nah, it is more that LLMs are a neat technology that allows computers to generate stuff on their own. Which has all sort of uses. It has solved the problem of typing big texts on your own. (read: it did not solve the problem of reviewing big texts)
But it has also gaslit managers into thinking it can do much more than its capabilities, so they demand it to be put into everything. With disastrous results.
Probably because “reasonable” is defined differently for every person.
Everyone thinks their worldview is the realistic one.
This feels a lot like a ragebait article.
What did Altman actually tweet that caused the backlash? I can’t seem to find it while skimming, only the responses to it.
-edit- Found it
It is a lot less rage inducing than the article makes it out to be.
Far-right, aren’t white supremacists?
Lol, what dimension are you from?
Seems like you didn’t learn anything about it, did you?
It is only hidden because too many non-programmers become hysterical whenever AI is mentioned.
In a rational world, it wouldn’t need to be hidden.
It is more nuance than rationality.
There are plenty of reasons to hate on AI. But in the end they are just tools to automate things. It depends entirely on how it is being used. With enough effort and most importantly checking the output, you can create things faster while still keeping the same quality as before.
Calling anything that even slightly touched an LLM “slop” and crawling in a fetus position while crying is a lot less rational. These people have no idea about the real world.
If you can’t understand the technology behind it, please refrain from calling other people names. It makes you look ignorant.
The EU is very privacy focused, as should be apparent with the post you are literally commenting on.
Your russian propaganda holds no power here. It didn’t work with chat control, and it won’t work with age verification either.
Yeah, tankies can’t handle it.
That “trojan horse” is nothing but a paper tiger since age control will be managed in a completely privacy-friendly way. It is a non-issue. So that is why it is being “overlooked”
The check will send nothing more than a yes/no verification, and no other forms of identification.
And the information will be managed by a governmental institute that already has all that information.
No, those things can be done in a completely private way.
There is no such thing as permanent laws. And for good reasons.
I wonder what all these anti-EU russian propaganda bots are going to use now to sow discontent against the EU… lol
The amount of falsely accused is less than 5% of all the rape cases.
So a women getting actually raped is about 20 times more likely than a man being falsely accused of rape.
And that is only counting all the instances where the rape got reported.
You stop taking crazy pills provided by manosphere grifters.
On eBay, right?