141–150 of 270 posts
I guess this is truth in marketing.
Contrast that with the Canonical ad provided as an example in the article, which I found a waste of my time and closed it after 30 seconds, having learned nothing and not drawn to use the product.
This article is a prime example of why tech literate people aren’t inherently strong marketers for tech. What does the Ubuntu ad say to the user? How does it capture someone’s attention? None of the ad tells me why this is something worth paying attention to versus other distros or OSs, it doesn’t even tell me it’s about the OS at all unless I already know what Ubuntu is. Contrast with the Apple ads that tell you exa…
That Ubuntu commercial left me with a weird akwardness, not knowing what or who it was for. It said "For you", which was the best part and I think it means I am in control of things, but that message might be lost with everybody not familiar with IT/Linux/Open Source. I don't know what certificates it was talking about though.
I think this is mostly just a problem of not having good reasons to sell AI products to consumers in the first place. I recently saw some Ray Ban Meta glasses ads. One of them had a guy ask the glasses to describe what was in front of his face, and then he remarked “wow that’s accurate” (there are people skateboarding). The guy wasn’t blind. His use of the glasses made little sense. Another ad has a young man asking…
The problem with "AI" is that when it is well integrated, and useful, it is often invisible to the user. Many people, for example, benefit from automatic (and instant) transcriptions in live Zoom meetings. This is pretty much complete magic -- and yet, boring. You don't notice it. You focus on the result, which you need, rather than the fact that it's "AI."
I think this is mostly just a problem of not having good reasons to sell AI products to consumers in the first place. I recently saw some Ray Ban Meta glasses ads. One of them had a guy ask the glasses to describe what was in front of his face, and then he remarked “wow that’s accurate” (there are people skateboarding). The guy wasn’t blind. His use of the glasses made little sense. Another ad has a young man asking…
> I’ve watched that little animation several times, and they tell a better story in a minute twenty-five than all of Apple’s AI commercials combined. If I showed that video to someone who isn't steeped in decades of Linux, I suspect they'd ask me what an Ubuntu is. As compared to the "schlub writes an email" video, which was compelling, funny, and actually shows the product they're marketing.
> As compared to the "schlub writes an email" video, which was compelling, funny OP is right, though. What you're calling "compelling" and "funny" seems very much also like messages telling you to that it's ok to lie to everyone around you including your family and friends. That's not a funny message to me. It's an appalling one.
Eh, "lovable but lazy dumbass forgot something and has to lie their way out of it" is a pretty standard trope of boomer sitcom humour.
Just imagine these ads, but the person using AI was Homer Simpson.
Appple are speaking to the “Everyman”, Canonical are speaking to the tech literate. Different audiences, Apple has power users, but its largest audience is an average person (my wife for example). The average person doesn’t care about tech, they want it to work, work well enough and be dependable. Linux is can be a minefield, and Windows is a mess IMO.
I'd really like to hold onto the belief that "make lying easier" doesn't speak to the everyman for just a little bit longer please.
I’m just being provocative to highlight this is a subtle issue. I agree with the general sentiment that Apple shouldn’t be encouraging ppl to lie. I found the actress kying to her colleague one quite tasteless.
That said, this all sums up how I feel about generative AI at the moment: a solution looking for a problem.
I think this is mostly just a problem of not having good reasons to sell AI products to consumers in the first place. I recently saw some Ray Ban Meta glasses ads. One of them had a guy ask the glasses to describe what was in front of his face, and then he remarked “wow that’s accurate” (there are people skateboarding). The guy wasn’t blind. His use of the glasses made little sense. Another ad has a young man asking…
I think this is mostly just a problem of not having good reasons to sell AI products to consumers in the first place. I recently saw some Ray Ban Meta glasses ads. One of them had a guy ask the glasses to describe what was in front of his face, and then he remarked “wow that’s accurate” (there are people skateboarding). The guy wasn’t blind. His use of the glasses made little sense. Another ad has a young man asking…
Yesterday I was walking in Greece and saw a sign I couldn't read so asked my Meta glasses and it gave me a translation and short explanation quickly, which was very helpful. But generally, yes the uses aren't there. In the Apple AI video, the worst is that the 'more professional' text, actually reads much less professional. If someone in a business situation sends you an AI generated email (and it's obviously AI it's…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm, personally not a fan of the current generation or implementation of AI and do not want to use it. Why not? It gives vastly better than human performance across a wide range of problems. Just this morning I asked Chat GPT to find me the smallest set of positive integers whose median is 2 and whose average is 3.75, and it just spit out the correct answer instantly. That would have been an enormous pain in the as…
Because, ultimately, I'd like to continue to think and solve on my own. If I want to leverage a chat model, which I do, I can do that very easily on my own hardware. I don't want it so far shoved down my phones innards that I'm paying for hardware that is useless outside that use case. Imagine the next 30 years when the majority of the population has no clue on how to function without cloud connected models answering…
The basis of this argument has probably existed for as long as humans have been able to self reflect.
If technology can very reliably do something I need to do better than I can do, why would I spend energy doing it myself.