Your point came through clearly to me. Shared tropes or setting do not make identical stories and, in fact, often enhance them as a counterbalance or familiar thing to compare against.
A wise friend of mine once said, in regard to "ideas are nothing; execution is everything": you can tell a thousand artists to paint a portrait of an Italian woman with a countryside landscape behind her but, good or bad, none of them are the mona lisa.
If anyone with power picks and chooses who gets justice then there is no justice, those people are corrupt, and they need to be removed from power and charged.
Whatabout whatabout whatabout. Charge, try, and imprison the guilty regardless of how much money they have, which political party they are part of, or how they vote. Anything else is madness.
> Constantly condemning people they don't know and have never met and don't understand.
> therefore everyone and everything is oriented around tribal group think
You can be more convincing if you don't group everyone into one bucket and throw insults at it.
A reader can pull your claims out - meta bad, thiel bad, ccp bad, sheeple bad - but there isn't anything substantive there (WHY are these bad; it's all ad hominem so far) and we have to sift through a bunch of insults in order to do it ( 1. Tribal group thinkers. 2. Can't recognize fascism. 3. Looking like religious zealots blindly condemning people we don't know. 4. Going to downvote without thinking or participating.)
Your comment looks a LOT like insult #3 up there, with some whining thrown in on top.
If you want a substantive conversation or debate about the different facets of data privacy then lay the groundwork with some good faith place to start. If you instead just post mini screeds pre-insulting everyone then lamenting that nobody engages then nothing is going to change for you.
lol, this is a great imply-but-don't-make-a-point from an account called gunapologist99.
Is the implication here that someone firing laser weapons at things flying near the airport has no realistic danger for planes flying near the airport and therefore this was an overreaction?
> write a mildly unhinged internet comment that tries to shame people for not knowing the true conspiracy all around them. Use themes like sheeple and kill squads. Explicitly call out Obama and only Obama and make sure you repeat one claim about Obama at least three times.
It's not obvious because the multiplier effect of AI is being used to reduce head count more than to drastically increase net output of a team. Which yeah is scary, but my point is if you don't see any multiplier effect from using that latest AI tools, you are either doing a bad job of using them (or don't have the budget, can't blame anyone for that), or are maybe in some obscure niche coding world?
>the multiplier effect of AI is being used to reduce head count more than to drastically increase net output of a team
This simply isn’t how economics works. There is always additional demand, especially in the software space. Every other productivity-boosting technology has resulted in an increase in jobs, not a decrease.
It's kind of inexplicable though, unless AI being the reason for layoffs is a lie, because it's true that historically there has always been way more demand for software than people who can make it (hence the decades of rising salaries relative to other professions).
It seems like too much of a coincidence that the AI got good enough to replace humans at exactly the same time that humans in general don't need as much software made.
This is a great line - evocative, funny, and a bit o wordplay.
I think you might be right about the behavior here; I haven't been able to otherwise understand the absolute forcing through of "use AI!!" by people and upon people with only a hazy notion of why and how. I suppose it's some version of nuclear deterrence or Pascal's wager -- if AI isn't a magic bullet then no big loss but if it is they can't afford not to be the first one to fire it.
I think one thing that I noticed this week in terms of "eye of the beholder" view on AI was the Goldman press release.
Apparently Anthropic has been in there for 6 months helping them with some back office streamlining and the outcome of that so far has been.. a press release announcing that they are working on it!
A cynic might also ask if this is simply PR for Goldman to get Anthropic's IPO mandate.
I think people underestimate the size/scope/complexity of big company tech stacks and what any sort of AI transformation may actually take.
It may turn into another cottage industry like big data / cloud / whatever adoption where "forward deployed / customer success engineers" are collocated by the 1000s for years at a time in order to move the needle.
A wise friend of mine once said, in regard to "ideas are nothing; execution is everything": you can tell a thousand artists to paint a portrait of an Italian woman with a countryside landscape behind her but, good or bad, none of them are the mona lisa.
reply