501–510 of 518 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can also see this being a major drawback. Any bias is everyone’s bias. Not saying it doesn’t happy at all today . But wow, scary
It's always been my belief that the full on faith put into future AI will be "how the AI takes over". We will look at these things as devine correctness, and eventually forget their human construction entirely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They should be freaking out. Google is overwhelmingly dependent on a single revenue stream and AI like ChatGPT is a serious threat to their dominant position. Not to mention, Google has spent a decade using their defacto monopoly as leverage and optimizing for ads and clicks, often exploiting their own users in the process. The bar for better was lower than it should have been, and the market is hungry for an alterna…
Yes this is the most insane thing about GOOG to me. Yes, search is basically monopoly moat of recurring growing revenue. On the other hand, they've spent not a decade, but about 25 years betting this would remain the case! I've met a lot of people who work at GOOG, and yet none of them could explain to me how the thing they work on makes any money for GOOG. In fact, most went out of their way to volunteer to me that…
Seems like Google leadership is freaking out. Also sounds like they really believe the whole founder-hero mythology if they think that Page-Brin can save the company. I don’t know how Google could be saved but perhaps having grateful and happy employees that would just build things in their 20% time might have been a better strategy. A truly revolutionary step would have been to buck the layoffs trend. But of course…
Seems like Google leadership is freaking out. Also sounds like they really believe the whole founder-hero mythology if they think that Page-Brin can save the company. I don’t know how Google could be saved but perhaps having grateful and happy employees that would just build things in their 20% time might have been a better strategy. A truly revolutionary step would have been to buck the layoffs trend. But of course…
They should be freaking out. Google is overwhelmingly dependent on a single revenue stream and AI like ChatGPT is a serious threat to their dominant position. Not to mention, Google has spent a decade using their defacto monopoly as leverage and optimizing for ads and clicks, often exploiting their own users in the process. The bar for better was lower than it should have been, and the market is hungry for an alterna…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely as opposed to those things. With Google, if you use a reliable source like Mayo, NIH, even a WebMD, It is clearly more likely to have accurate information than something that proves even numbers are prime. Certainly all those things can be inaccurate but where in the world you think ChatGPT pattern matches it’s information from?
Exactly. ChatGPT is clearly very impressive and useful, but nothing from its output should be treated as valid or factual to any degree. Information generated by humans will include things like transpositional errors, logical errors, popular misconceptions, and misinterpretations of data. Mistakes happen, but human mistakes are at least tethered to real thoughts/information. On the other hand, AI will happily spin up…
Sure. What makes you think a human won't?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. ChatGPT is clearly very impressive and useful, but nothing from its output should be treated as valid or factual to any degree. Information generated by humans will include things like transpositional errors, logical errors, popular misconceptions, and misinterpretations of data. Mistakes happen, but human mistakes are at least tethered to real thoughts/information. On the other hand, AI will happily spin up…
> AI will happily spin up a complete fabrication with zero basis in reality, give you as much detail as you ask for, and dress it all up in competent and authoritative-sounding prose. Sure. What makes you think a human won't?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. Search ads are pretty much the perfect internet business model - if my biz is having a sale on lawnmowers, who better to target than people googling for "buy lawnmower"? If this is done right, everyone walks away happy and google makes a killing. ChatGPT is great, but it's pretty far from providing good answers to "where can I get a good deal on a lawnmower right now?" They might take over a decent share of…
Ads work because they're embedded in interesting or useful things. No one would use a search engine composed of 100% ads. Chat-GPT can be used for this: returing interesting results. The ads don't have to be served through chat-GPT, but could be given as a side result.
And why I'm using Google less and less. I've literally had the entire first page be all ads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
got any french/german techno? I would really appreciate it.
Sure. I'll post some artists with my favorite songs as youtube links, as I know that not everyone on this site has a spotify subscription. On a sidenote: Looks like techno had massive growth in the last 1-2 years. I discovered most of these artists when they were much smaller. Now most of them have 3x to 10x more monthly listeners. Seems like Spotify is indeed a great platform for discoverability. For monetizing prob…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google+ was good until google lost its mind and started shoving it everywhere- even I as a google+ user HATED this. It was to me the social network for grownups without the Facebook clickbait - I liked the circles model too (I did one for professional stuff one for personal) and great photos support. But then someone was put in charge who lost their mind and just started wrecking products (YouTube etc) with plus and…
Same. I was avid Google+ user. Circles were great. I had made many friends with varied interests.
It was nicely contenty and bloggy feeling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean stanford. Getting a patent in no way means you were first.
Google is the initial assignee and a patent provides exclusionary rights to the inventor of a technology. Great if someone else thought of it earlier but no one published anything using it or thought to get a patent, because otherwise this very important patent would have been void and it wasn’t.