This could actually be an improvement. Depending on how greedy the āAIā stuff turns out.
How long until Goldman Sachs execs in court blame some financial irregularities on AI and proclaim the company blameless?
āā¦ itās the customerās own fault for believing what our machine saidā 
What do you mean, financial irregularities? Itās all perfectly legal.
ā¦ at least according to this majority opinion written by Chief Justice GPT-7
I guess donāt really get the excitement about āAIā. I make model spaceships and I posted them on Reddit once, and someone commented that I could make really cool pictures if I used āAIā. But whatās the point, I wouldnāt have any fun or challenge if I did so. I sometimes have the feeling that if we use apps and ai for everything, thereās not going to be much point being human, being alive. When every single interaction and choice is filtered through tech we will have built our own cage and climbed in willingly.
If the cage is cozy enough most people wouldnāt mind. Or even notice.
oh, this is soo good! thanx!
But here is where the reporting really goes off the rails. AGI is not a thing. It doesnāt exist. Therefore, it canāt do anything, no matter what the AI cultists say.
e/
It is an enormous disservice to the public to report on this as if it were a ādebateā rather than a disruption of science by billionaires throwing money at the hope of bringing about the speculative fiction stories they grew up reading
yes. yes!
When I saw the Reuters article linked I was going to respond with that Mastodon thread!
You put in a couple of circuits to improve target accuracy, and before you know it youāre arguing with a thermonuclear device whether it should detonate or not.
oh, hell yeah! thats such a great idea! /s
