The Right hates this guy now. But for the life of me, I can't figure out why. He was the absolute poster child. "I'm just asking questions" (where you ask completely unfounded questions in an effort to shift discourse where it doesn't need to go) is a cornerstone of MAGA "thought".
...except that saying anything against the MAGA cult leader gets you a permaban. And thus, Tucker is out.
As other commenters have said, a key factor hasn't hit yet: AI is artificially cheap because the whole thing is running on a bunch of investor money in a giant loop.
Once some IPOs go through, these companies will be required (by law) to produce a return to their investors. Given the actual costs of the AI chain, that will be extremely, extremely difficult to do, if it is possible at all.
At the very least, expect some mergers / acquisitions as companies try and consolidate to fix the shortfall by reducing competition. Though specifics are hard to pin down, given the complexity of the production chain and the associated energy costs, this likely won't be enough.
The market will self-correct when it's cheaper to do things the old way. Obviously, FOSS projects should fall off the AI wagon pretty quickly, since they're not revenue generating anyway (at least not directly).
Yeah, this is a major issue across the board. For a wide variety of products, if they clearly marked which were AI generated, then the sales would likely speak for themselves.
But companies don't really want to do this. They want to mix AI slop in with regular products, so that over time, the average consumer dumbs down enough to no longer know the difference. Then they just generate every product ever and number go up.
This still ignores the fact that no one will have money to put into the system from the bottom (which is the only way it flows in an economy), but here we are.
That's the thing: it doesn't have to be better since it's 100% free. It could be considerably worse and still be the better choice for the price.
The fact that it's mostly on par is absolute gravy.
No no, real numbers would hurt the bottom line. AI relies on great expectations and overly trusting techbros.
Playing by the rules went away a loooooong time ago. At this point the Dems just look silly for even bringing it up.
We could be beyond it. What hasn't happened quite yet are things like failing currencies, but it's entirely possible we are beyond the point of no return. Once the giant ring of investments catches up with itself, the snake eats its own tail, the bottom drops out, and the greatest economic crash the world has ever seen stampedes unfettered through the lives of every person on the planet.
Almost too good to be a dad joke. Almost too bad to be repeated.
To look at this another way: the government of South Korea has decided to give people the feeling of a strike without actually letting it affect bottom lines in any meaningful way. That is, they have relegated the strike (a key utility of those fighting for workers' rights) to being a tool used solely to assuage discontent in the short term. Without economic teeth, it cannot be used to enhance the lives of workers, which is ultimately the explicit goal of any strike.
South Korea is of course not alone in reducing or eliminating the rights of its citizens so that corporations continue to profit at their expense.
That is a good point. There's a lot of overt cruelty which seems to Literally exist to "own the libs", as Onion-y as it sounds. It's quite disgusting considering the party pretty much owns everything at the moment.
Schoolyard charades, but with higher stakes and real, human victims, at scale.
It's not even the wrecking of the economy that really gets to me about this latest Republican administration. That's a pattern for sure, but this admin grifts right off the top, in plain sight. The Trump phones, the ballrooms, the sweetheart deals for friends, the IRS decision that puts taxpayer funds directly into the President's pocket.
I can't think of another admin that has so openly stolen from US citizens.
Agreed. Not sure why one should trust this source.
The IRS has some relatively detailed specifications about their use of AI on their website. I haven't looked carefully enough to make a judgment, but given the internet and clickbait, I wouldn't be surprised if the original link is embellishing some specifics.