41–50 of 117 posts
First a contacts app that bombed, and now an ai assistant? I fear she’s stuck in the past and now is in a beyond crowded space. Have any of her attempts post google worked?
This person has a history of failures venturing on their own.
"That product saw little adoption due to privacy concerns about privacy, and pretty much languished." - A professional writer
Ironically, an AI would write a better sentence than this professional writer.
But if you gave both a month to write the best 400 word article they could possibly generate on a particular subject, the human author would dominate. Give them time to make a few drafts, to research and think and talk to people, to edit and reorganize and restart and rehearse, and they'll produce something that's worth being read and re-read and considered thoughtfully by thousands of people.
The problem is that the journalism industry has become optimized to generate content to be skimmed by a few people and read by thousands of bots.
First a contacts app that bombed, and now an ai assistant? I fear she’s stuck in the past and now is in a beyond crowded space. Have any of her attempts post google worked?
Yes. She made a tremendous amount of money for herself while failing miserably at Yahoo!.
Oh, you mean attempts at getting workable, groundbreaking new products out into the market with success? No.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Typos and grammatical errors are common in journalism nowadays, even with formerly respected organizations like APNews.
I think it boils down to you get what you pay for. If information is free, it will become same as noise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ironically, an AI would write a better sentence than this professional writer.
The AI would, hands down, write a better sentence if you compared the output quality of an author writing 10,000 words per day with an AI writing 10,000 words per day. Or make the AI write 100,000 words per day, it could write sentences better than that 24/7 without breaking a sweat, while the human would literally be incapable of achieving this goal. But if you gave both a month to write the best 400 word article th…
What proof is there for this?
"Former Yahoo CEO Marissa Meyer is closing the doors on her consumer software startup Sunshine, and is selling the company’s assets to her new AI startup, Dazzle" and "all of Sunshine’s employees will move to the new company". Under what conditions is it better to buy the assets and hire the employees instead of just change the name and product offering of the company? Is it just to get the investors off the cap tabl…
Ostensibly, it is in what you left out of your question? If you can buy the assets, specifically, you can not buy the liabilities. Obviously, getting some people off of obligation lists is one of them. There could be others?
In this case though with a new name and product that won't be an issue.
[1] someone else will remember the name of that company - it escapes me
First a contacts app that bombed, and now an ai assistant? I fear she’s stuck in the past and now is in a beyond crowded space. Have any of her attempts post google worked?
>Have any of her attempts post google worked? Yes. She made a tremendous amount of money for herself while failing miserably at Yahoo!. Oh, you mean attempts at getting workable, groundbreaking new products out into the market with success? No.
I was at Yahoo from 2004-2011, so I've got my opinions, but I think failing miserably at Yahoo is like the default option. It was a great gig to take in 2012 --- if you do well, well then it's clearly your leadership; if you don't do well, it's that Yahoo wasn't salvageable.