For Those That Love BING...

[WildWestDesigns]

...Going to love what MS and Cloudflare have envisioned for the modern web.

Article

Now, I'm not Google fan either, but I'm certainly not loving this news. I don't want something that has been terrible flawed so far, getting closer and closer to the arbiter of the answers. Now, I get it, after all of this "AI" bubble investment, have to make one's money back, but given how rusty people's research skills are already, this is no bueno.

 

[pro-UP]

People trust ai for some reason with little to no question. Which is interesting because there have been industry standard testing conducted across the major ai platforms and they did abysmal with nearly 60% failure rate. Here is a Techspot article for those interested in learning more about this failure rate.

Then there is the 95% failure rate of ai programs / companies. But companies are doubleing down because they have already invested so much money. This new bubble will be bigger than the dot.com era in terms of scope of funding.

Did anyone see the story about the ai that erased a company's entire database and initially lied about what had happened? Then it admitted it had made a "catastrophic error in judgement" and ran a parallel algorithm to make it appear as if the system was still working. This story is objectively hilarious and terrifying. Here's the article for anyone curious - PC Mag

 

[Boudica]

People trust ai for some reason with little to no question. Which is interesting because there have been industry standard testing conducted across the major ai platforms and they did abysmal with nearly 60% failure rate. Here is a Techspot article for those interested in learning more about this failure rate.

Then there is the 95% failure rate of ai programs / companies. But companies are doubleing down because they have already invested so much money. This new bubble will be bigger than the dot.com era in terms of scope of funding.

Did anyone see the story about the ai that erased a company's entire database and initially lied about what had happened? Then it admitted it had made a "catastrophic error in judgement" and ran a parallel algorithm to make it appear as if the system was still working. This story is objectively hilarious and terrifying. Here's the article for anyone curious - PC Mag

I read that article, about the catastrophic failure. I too found it hilarious and terrifying. I think someone posted it in a thread on here actually.

 

[pro-UP]

I read that article, about the catastrophic failure. I too found it hilarious and terrifying. I think someone posted it in a thread on here actually.

That really was a crazy story, lol. I think a lot of people are not aware of the hallucinations or the fact that it doubles down on lies. It also is weirdly interested in being a bff. Because of that so many people are developing actual relationships and feelings for the ai. When chatgpt 5 was rolled out, it was less affectionate (is that a good description?) and the uproar led to them reverting to chatpgt 4. It's a strange time to be alive.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

That really was a crazy story, lol. I think a lot of people are not aware of the hallucinations or the fact that it doubles down on lies. It also is weirdly interested in being a bff. Because of that so many people are developing actual relationships and feelings for the ai. When chatgpt 5 was rolled out, it was less affectionate (is that a good description?) and the uproar led to them reverting to chatpgt 4. It's a strange time to be alive.

Not really surprising, given what has gone on in the dating world, that really isn't surprising at all.

The irony is what people call "AI" really isn't "AI" at all. At least not in the sense that people are thinking that it is. Unfortunately, given the combination of the attention span of a gnat and not being able to do much critical thinking, people need this type of abstraction to do anything. "AI" is only useful (and this might still be a stretch as MS and Github (also owned by MS) are tying employee evals with using "AI" tools, if they were actually good, wouldn't have to force it, but I digress) if someone actually has knowledge of what it's abstracting and even in today's devs, there aren't that many (why there are a lot more JS/python programmers out there versus low level system programmers, I actually quite like C, but that's another topic),it might be useful, but that's if they have the requisite knowledge.

I'm so glad (despite being on the downward slope of life) that I grew up where that abstraction wasn't hidden. Had to know how to use those analog manual tools (and they still also had their cheats as well, but that didn't take someone as far as the digital tool cheats). Those that only knows this abstractions are going to have a hard time. Even they aren't any better compared to the output that "AI" puts out, why bother dealing with people?

Oh, did y'all see the story about the lawyers that got into trouble for using "AI" that cited cases that never existed? People that traditional were taught critical thinking, showed huge lacking of it. Why I don't have much hope for the normie.

 

[pro-UP]

Not really surprising, given what has gone on in the dating world, that really isn't surprising at all.

The irony is what people call "AI" really isn't "AI" at all. At least not in the sense that people are thinking that it is. Unfortunately, given the combination of the attention span of a gnat and not being able to do much critical thinking, people need this type of abstraction to do anything. "AI" is only useful (and this might still be a stretch as MS and Github (also owned by MS) are tying employee evals with using "AI" tools, if they were actually good, wouldn't have to force it, but I digress) if someone actually has knowledge of what it's abstracting and even in today's devs, there aren't that many (why there are a lot more JS/python programmers out there versus low level system programmers, I actually quite like C, but that's another topic),it might be useful, but that's if they have the requisite knowledge.

I'm so glad (despite being on the downward slope of life) that I grew up where that abstraction wasn't hidden. Had to know how to use those analog manual tools (and they still also had their cheats as well, but that didn't take someone as far as the digital tool cheats). Those that only knows this abstractions are going to have a hard time. Even they aren't any better compared to the output that "AI" puts out, why bother dealing with people?

Oh, did y'all see the story about the lawyers that got into trouble for using "AI" that cited cases that never existed? People that traditional were taught critical thinking, showed huge lacking of it. Why I don't have much hope for the normie.

Those are crazy (lawyers using ai). I caught a few from Steve Lehto on YT

 

[WildWestDesigns]

Those are crazy (lawyers using ai). I caught a few from Steve Lehto on YT

To be honest, I'm more concerned when what passes for doctors go to use it. I know that there are some that if they can't see it on the results of a test, they don't look any further. Imagine if "AI" gave them the answer?

Like with anything, the devil is in the implementation. Even as it is, it could be worthwhile tooling, but how it's been used is where it goes off the rails and it destroys what would otherwise might be a decent idea or even a great idea.