feɪl

Фэил

And like, it’s not even a good gimmick. It’s a serious labour issue because the primary intent behind a lot of AI has always been to just phase out workers.

I’m all for ending work through technological advancement and universal income, but this definitely wasn’t going to get us that, so…

Well, why would I support something that mostly just threatens people’s livelihoods and gives even more power to the 0.1%?

True for the consumer side, but I’d be willing to bet that a decent chunk of that money that giant corporations burned funded some serious research on AI that can go on to actually useful science things

Why don’t companies get this? If you make something free in the beginning, people will become conditioned that it’s not worth paying for.

Exactly. I have used quite a few products and my thoughts have been. That’s cool, but when would I ever need this? The few useful usecases I have for it could use a small local model for very specific purposes and that’s it. Not make them billions of dollars level of usefulness.

Your average tech hype cycle. New tech comes out, lots of marketing, people try to shove it everywhere, then things settle down and the tech either fills a certain chunk of the market or some niche or it dies.

Even within a company. Saw coworkers that were trying to establish themselves as the AI pioneers and were backstabbing others get promotions based on how they could best use the ChatGPT AI.

It might be in the volume and price of projects

And I was always taught that capitalism allocates the resources ideally. /s

From the article - “which is twice the failure rate for non-AI technology-related startups.”

It’s much worse. Generally speaking projects in large corporations at least try to make sense and to have a decent chance to return something of value. But with AI projects is like they all went insane, they disregard basic things, common sense, fundamental logic etc.