141–150 of 243 posts
I would suggest that if LinkedIn is training their AI models on user data and content, users should get a copy of the said model free of charge. That or LinkedIn should at least be compelled to ask explicit permission for model training. None of this Darth Vader stuff where they "altered the deal".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why on earth would you train AI on that ? In the social media world it's already the closest thing resembling boring, unreadable machine generated content. No matter what you ask it, it'll brag about what a great job it's doing answering you, announce that it's having a baby, then tell everybody that it's being let go because there are better AI. It'll thank a few key people who it worked with, and tell you that it's…
Because there is a huge market for resume builders and career guidance where AI can play a role. Using LinkedIn you can measure success and network performance and correlate that to the resume and posted content.
I have seen a number of CVs over the past few months that fall into two eye-rolling categories. First, those that have the same set of skills in the exact same order, and routinely sport identical expressions. Over time I've come to associate them with low-grade content farms. Second, a smaller set of exceptionally polished ones that feel unique and really want me to interview the candidate. These candidates will then utterly bomb in the interview, to the point where I'm often asking myself whose CV it was they had submitted.
Signal-to-noise ratio is tending towards zero.
Somehow i feel sad for this AI model. All the others are trained on authentic content and this boy gets socialised on the most shallow content imaginable. Poor, socially awkward AI.
I would suggest that if LinkedIn is training their AI models on user data and content, users should get a copy of the said model free of charge. That or LinkedIn should at least be compelled to ask explicit permission for model training. None of this Darth Vader stuff where they "altered the deal".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because there is a huge market for resume builders and career guidance where AI can play a role. Using LinkedIn you can measure success and network performance and correlate that to the resume and posted content.
There's also real money in writing LinkedIn content that is believable enough for "influencers" to post. I'm currently contracting, and post on LinkedIn at least once a day, and I've added ~1k+ followers in the last month, but it takes effort. Meanwhile, those posts have gotten me work, and so if it was feasible for me to outsource it in a reputationally safe way, I'd consider it. For me the bar for "reputationally s…
A Nash Equilibrium of automated bullshit, it'll just make everything more miserable, programmatically.
Tell stories how “a man walked and saved universe” and end every sentence with “agree?”?
Somehow i feel sad for this AI model. All the others are trained on authentic content and this boy gets socialised on the most shallow content imaginable. Poor, socially awkward AI.
Yesterday I was walking to an interview. There was a starving dog on the road. I stopped to feed him & missed the interview. The next day I got a call asking to come in to do the interview. I was surprised, but I went. Then the interviewer came in. He was the dog.
EU here, I don't have this option in Settings.
Me too, but I wonder if it's actually a GDPR perk or maybe some regional A/B kind of thing. Or whatever. I mean, I am not sure if it's a good news or a bad news.