Did anyone stop to ask themselves if we even would want to watch AI videos?

Of course not.

I, and I suspect many other people, watch YouTube for the people in the videos and their experiences (or at least the illusion of that). Watching fake videos defeats the whole purpose.

YouAITube sounds like nothing more than a kaleidoscope with extra steps.

That’s what happens when you aren’t the (sole) paying customer.

I think anyone familiar with the laws of thermodynamics could have predicted this outcome.

1 can be solved with regulation or nationalization. Services online should be public services. Like school, police, roads. You can still have private alternatives too.

It’s funny that with all our technology, paper is still the most durable storage medium (under normal conditions) that doesn’t cost an arm and a leg.

Sophistication often creates fragility. The human mind marvels at sophistication naturally; appreciation for resilience usually only comes after that fragile thing has broken. Of course it’s too late by then.

All them young whipper snappers will continue to learn these life lessons the hard way, it seems.

This is not how patents work. At all.

For one, patent owners are generally more than happy to license their technology to integrators, and even competitors, if there is money to be made.

More importantly, patents cannot be used to get exclusivity on products. Rather, patents can only protect novel approaches to how a product is made or served.

The patent system is designed to protect R&D costs exclusively, not some get out of jail card for anti trust. Of course, the patent office isn’t perfect, the system does get abused in anti-competitive ways. But in the end, it’s rare that that results in less consumer choice, because of licensing deals.

LLMs == AGI was and continues to be a massive lie perpetuated by tech companies and investors that people still have not woken up to.

You are right, crypto has nothing to do with currency printing. And yes, the environmental side too is a problem (unless it is produced inline with recycled energy) But governments issuing currency is a relatively recent phenomenon. Historically, people traded de facto currencies and IOUs amongst themselves.

Bitcoin was conceived out of the 2008 financial crisis, as a direct response to big banks being bailed out. It’s literally written in Bitcoin’s Genesis block. The point of Bitcoin has always been to free people from the tyranny of big government AND big capital.

Crypto isn’t that popular in developed countries with functioning monetary systems… untill of course those big institutions fail. I am still quite surprised, this side of Bitcoin is rarely discussed on Lemmy, given how anticapitalist it is.

I get it libertarian, bad. And to some degree, there are a lot of problems there. But the extreme opposite ain’t that rosy either.

That has nothing to do with AI and is strictly a return policy matter. You can get a return in less than 2 minutes by speaking to a human at Home Depot.

Businesses choose to either prioritize customer experience, or not.

Oh look, more anticompetitive shenanigans.

Break Google up. Bring the full force of antitrust down on them.

Anything else is an unmitigated disaster waiting to happen.

Generative AI is incapable of contributing new material, because Generative AI does not sense the world through a unique perspective. So the comparison to creators that incorporate prior artists work is a false comparison. Artists are allowed to incorporate other artists work in the same way that scientists cite other’s work without it being plagiarism.

In art, in science, we stand on the shoulders of giants. AI models do not stand on the shoulders of giants. AI models just replicate the giants. Society has been fooled to think otherwise.

I’ve said this before, I’m going to say it again: people with money spend it to save time.

Managing 2FA, software updates, account signin, device pairing, billing, privacy policy updates, cookie notices… This shit does not save people time. It does the complete opposite.

These products are not built for consumers. These products are purely anticompetitive schemes, propping up crappy business models, trying to cash in on the data harvesting gold rush.

“Hard to understand?” Is a question more complex than it might appear on the surface. There are obvious examples of ambiguity in speech which lead to complete misunderstanding.

But “hard to understand?” may also satisfy the criteria of “effort to understand”. Just because a message was understood does not mean the audience was able to hear it effortlessly. And that boils down to consideration.

It’s a two way street. Correcting mistakes because of apparent lack of effort is probably not warranted, but a speaker is not entitled to a happy audience either

As with many online feuds, I think a lot of these problems typically arise because of a lack of operating under the assumption others are acting in good faith.

I think there is a very fine line between prescribing language because of a world view that insists on conformity, and correcting grammer and vocabulary because being clear and understood is kinda the point of language.

Who the f. has time to manage all these bills, apps, accounts… What’s next, 2FA to sit around for an app to update, so you can sit through a “what’s new” tutorial to unlock a pen just so you can write something down, all for the “convenience” of not having to run out of ink?

You know what people with money and no time do? They buy 20 dumb pens and then just toss one in the trash when it runs out.

The intersection between people who have money to burn and patience to deal with tech bullshit is extremely small.

The parodies write themselves now.

Yes and no. I’m sure there is an argument to be made that a house can be too big. Bigger houses require more maintenance, cleaning, higher taxes. Downsizing a house is also a retirement strategy.

Nothing is going to change until people die because of this shit.

What makes you say Brother printers are bad? I’ve had no complaints with them at all.