Meta is killing off its AI-powered Instagram and Facebook profiles

Post by zeusk » Sat, Jan 04, 2025, 6:43 PM UTC

AlexandrB wrote: post #223

asdev wrote: post #215

I hope the stock gets destroyed next earnings when people realize they've been spending all this money on AI all to not ship a single meaningful feature nor derive any revenue leveraging it. They did the exact same thing with the whole "Metaverse" thing

The metaverse craze was hilarious. I heard of a large retailer that paid ~$0.5 million to hold their annual all-hands in a metaverse "venue". The whole thing collapsed under the weight of a few hundred attendees and they had to revert to a zoom call.

Post by jazzyjackson » Sat, Jan 04, 2025, 6:44 PM UTC

kraftman wrote: post #124

xracy wrote: post #80

I feel like the question I want to ask is "Why do we need AI-Profiles?" Like, I can barely be bothered to keep in touch with my friends and family. Why do I need a fake person to be follow on social media? What purpose does it serve? What possibly comes out of this that is positive?

Its the other way around. It's about giving people the attention they need exactly because they dont keep in touch any more, so they have a reason to come back to the platform.

Post by thwarted » Sat, Jan 04, 2025, 6:46 PM UTC

notahacker wrote: post #188

hopfenspergerj wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re meta and you have to defend the AI by admitting “it’s not really intelligent and everything it says is bullshit”, that’s not a position of strength.

Particularly when it's likely that despite the AI bullshitting in the absence of data on its creators, it's also incidentally true that the "black queer momma" persona is a few lines of behavioural stereotypes composed by white male programmers without any particular experience of black queer mommas.

Post by gazchop » Sat, Jan 04, 2025, 6:47 PM UTC

fardo wrote: post #236

gazchop wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Neurosama, an AI streamer, is massively popular. This only proves that there's enough people on the planet around that bit of the bell curve to develop an audience.

Aspersions aside, the content’s actually typically pretty involved and has a lot to speak for itself, it’s not low-effort content that one would typically associate with AI. Laid bare, it’s generally a variety comedy show of a human host and AI riffing off each other, the AI and the chat arguing and counter-roasting each other with human mediation to either double down or steer discussions or roasts in more interesti…

Post by thunky » Sat, Jan 04, 2025, 6:51 PM UTC

yakshaving_jgt wrote: post #219

thunky wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But that's what racists are, people who think the race of a person has predictive power with regard to their nature, culture etc. I didn't think that's how the term racist is normally used. A definition: a person who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group Big difference.

To be fair, how the term is normally used depends entirely on the group within which the term is being used. For many, racism is strictly “prejudice + power”, which logically concludes in the [in my opinion rather warped] idea that some groups are incapable of racism, which is at odds with the definition you’re citing