Time to update the old quote? 'Show me your AI and conceal your data structures, and I shall continue to be mystified. Show me your data structures and I won't need your AI.'
We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis
161–170 of 427 posts
Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but I already sometimes feel this way with text and autocorrect... Just disable autocorrect. The amount of times where people communicate and a typo is a critical problem is aproximateley 0, you can manually correct them at those times.
I hate auto-correct because it doesn't stay in its lane. It tends to expect me to use the most common 10,000 or so words in English and will actually auto-bork totally valid words because it thinks it knows better than me. I get whenever I'm using shorthand or weird acronyms or technical jargon that it might get confused, but when a word I type is both a) a real word and b) something I would use in every-day speech j…
Even better, you accidentally click on the incorrectly typed word and add it to your dictionary.
Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a patch thanks to contributor Marx but everyone keeps pressing "remind me later".
Working example needed.
Socialism, like capitalism, also has a zero day vulnerability by the name of mundane old “human corruption” that undermines its goals. Capitalism just works better because it pits people against each other, keeping the focus off authority and top level control.
Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does bribing not exist in that system?
Sure there is. I don't know which motivation you'd have to bribe someone to promite your product, though. Would also be hard to sustain if intellectual property was decommodified. Other, more pressing concerns have to be addressed, though.
>your product
In a hypothetical world where I don't benefit from a competitive advantage, in what sense do I own the product / company?
Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
the negative feedback is that any attempt to create quality, non-seo content is punished by being ranked low and so we revert to average/low quality of over-SEOed but low signal content. Like other users have noticed, publishing a good recipe is not enough, you have to fill it up with useless fluff. and you have to make pretty URLs . And add meta the tags This happens for tech advice too, like linux solutions etc
SEO content is a positive feedback loop.
That would imply there isn't an equilibrium.
Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis
#166Typical H1b empty promises.
Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis
#167The commercial opinion bit is incredibly annoying. Ask for an opinion and you’ll get 5 pages of custom built “review” sites that offer nothing useful besides copious ads and paid click-through to Amazon. Even when Google knows where I go with my searches, they still refuse to show those sites for anything that might have commercial interest. So much for customized search. I get tired of being the product. Can we get…
Just curious - how much would you pay for that? $20/mo? $30/mo?
One one hand I completely agree, and hope for paid service alternatives to all these "free" products. On the other hand, I can find everything I need through Google, as is, so why pay for an alternative?
Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess the prospect of literally a hundred billion dollars each made them reconsider.
It would be interested to know how this process looked like. I'd imagine it was very gradual and consisted of little steps each leading to the next one, and when they finally started to serve ads they were probably thinking it's not that bad. I believe crossing that line made paved the way for considering things like tracking the whole web morally acceptable, maybe even positive.
My hypothesis is that at some point someone was given clearance to try a couple of plainly-evil things, and the results were so wildly lucrative that the "don't be evil" faction either defected or lost all sway.
Notably, ads in-line with results. I suspect that was the first move that sent them irrevocably down the evil-path. Watch a non-tech-geek use Google and you'll see why—I bet ad-clicks went up 10x with that change, or more. Then they began to serve ads beyond those early "non-evil" clearly marked text-only ads. That led to them making tons of money from webspam sites, while also putting tons of effort into fighting webspam, and some time around '09 or so they realized they should lay off the latter, on account of the former.
And here we are. Google search is worse, Google advertise deceptively on purpose, and the whole web is overrun with webspam.
Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
At this point, the snide dismissal of all things advertising is nothing short of boring. To be sure there are many forms of advertising annoyance: auto-playing sound/video, remarketing (or what I like to call advertising a product I've already bought), interstitials, popups (to be fair, there are many non-advertising forms of these eg "sign up to our newsletter" dialogs) and so on. But what made Google a money-printi…
> " Imagine I search for "how do I sleep on an airplane". Isn't a neck travel pillow an appropriate result here? " No? I mean, seen through the lens of extractive capitalism where "how do I X" is the same as "what product do I buy to do X", and "someone asking about X" is the same as "which product to shove in their face to make them stop asking and extract the most money out of them", maybe yes. Doesn't "information…
This should be the top reply.
Google’s advertising may be very profitable and effective, that doesn’t mean it’s in the user’s best interest.
Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
For one, when they started ads, they were not inline with the search results, and in brightly highlighted boxes. So it was easy to say, you know, we have ads, but they don't affect search results. Today they say the same thing, but nontechnical users can no longer distinguish ads from their organic search results.
Non-technical users can't read the bolded "Ad" in the top left? Ok, it's more subtle than before but it doesn't prey on the less sophisticated among us.
Watch a non-nerd use Google. They 100% do click on those ads without realizing they're ads. Constantly. I wouldn't be surprised if most ad-clicks for Google are performed by people having no clue they're clicking on an ad.