91–100 of 330 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is inconceivable for this demographic to think of a product that can enrich both the corporation and the users. Would you care to provide an example of such a product, to dissuade this perceived demographic cohort? I am not so certain your creative name calling will yield much results, however.
ChatGPT
[flagged]
> It is inconceivable for this demographic to think of a product that can enrich both the corporation and the users. Would you care to provide an example of such a product, to dissuade this perceived demographic cohort? I am not so certain your creative name calling will yield much results, however.
Is your life not enhanced by these products?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you lived in the US and you didn't like this product, you can just choose to not use it. What benefit do you as a citizen of Europe derive from having this withheld from you?
"You can just choose not to use it", sure, until signing a consent form to use ChatGPT becomes mandatory for a doctor visit, just like all kinds of other technology (like having a cell phone to verify SMS, for example) is basically essential now to function in society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If an insurer is able to reduce (or recoup) costs from likelier risks, then the remaining insureds benefit from lower premiums. If the goal is providing subsidies (i.e. wealth transfers), then insurance is not the way to do it. That is the government’s role.
Insurance that is maximally responsive to patient health changes in terms of cost (ie making healthier people pay less) ends up being an inefficient way of just having people pay for their healthcare directly. And it naturally means the people with highest premiums are the least likely to be able to afford it (the elderly, the disabled, those with chronic conditions that make them less likely to maintain high earning…
"If I focused on my health, ate clean and exercised daily, why should I also be subsidizing Billy "video-games-are-my-exercise" fatass's chronic health conditions?"
This is why there is a hyperfixation on shifting blame away from (failing) individuals. The logic breaks when Billy has to admit he just hates exercising.
And yes, before you comment, I know "maybe Billy has (condition outside all control) so it's not on him". Please, see what I just said in the previous statement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Users found value in leaded gasoline too.
Which is not a helpful argument in this discussion. It's to blunt and feels more ignorant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is inconceivable for this demographic to think of a product that can enrich both the corporation and the users. Would you care to provide an example of such a product, to dissuade this perceived demographic cohort? I am not so certain your creative name calling will yield much results, however.
I mean… you don’t need to look very hard. Smart phones? Google Maps? Is your life not enhanced by these products?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This kind of comment scares me because it's an example of people substituring professional advice for an LLM where LLMs are known to hallucinate or otherwise simply make stuff up. I see this all the time when I write queries and get the annoying Gemini AI snippet on a subject I know about and often I'll see the AI make provably and objectively false statements.
You are exaggerating. LLMs simply don’t hallucinate all that often, especially ChatGPT. I really hate comments such as yours because anyone who has used ChatGPT in these contexts would know that it is pretty accurate and safe. People also can generally be trusted to identify good from bad advice. They are smart like that. We should be encouraging thoughtful ChatGPT use instead of showing fake concern at each opportun…
LLMs are accurate with everything you don't know but are factually incorrect with things you are an expert in is a common comment for a reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean… you don’t need to look very hard. Smart phones? Google Maps? Is your life not enhanced by these products?
Not really. The provide convenience, sure, but fundamentally all technology creates dependence and limits freedom by influencing behavior in subtle ways, while disproportionately benefiting the technology owner/operator.