Artificial intelligence and the future

[O Really]

Thanks for thinking of us, but I'm not going to give AI a view to tally. It's going to be the death of actual performers.

Maybe, maybe not. I may have enjoyed that selection for what I wanted it for at the time, but it's really pretty bland. Maybe making elevator/background music isn't a bad job for AI and actual performers do the creative stuff you'd pay to go to a concert for. There's something about a live show that may not be easily replaced. Opps - having said that, on re-think I realized there's this:

ABBA "live" at the ABBA Arena, London. But not live at all.

[GoCubsGo]

Thanks for thinking of us, but I'm not going to give AI a view to tally. It's going to be the death of actual performers.

Maybe, maybe not. I may have enjoyed that selection for what I wanted it for at the time, but it's really pretty bland. Maybe making elevator/background music isn't a bad job for AI and actual performers do the creative stuff you'd pay to go to a concert for. There's something about a live show that may not be easily replaced. Opps - having said that, on re-think I realized there's this:

ABBA "live" at the ABBA Arena, London. But not live at all.

Feels creepy, like I'm watching the Melania documentary.

[O Really]

Seemed really fantastical back in the day, eh?

[Vrede too]

Feels creepy, like I'm watching the Melania documentary.

Is she AI? Is the audience in this video AI? I'd rather spend my money on a good ABBA cover band.

[Vrede too]

This CEO laid off nearly 80% of his staff because they refused to adopt AI fast enough. 2 years later, he says he’d do it again

[supesalemgr2]

This CEO laid off nearly 80% of his staff because they refused to adopt AI fast enough. 2 years later, he says he’d do it again

I believe his response was a little harsh, but understand the underlying premise. I was involved with a merger in my career and saw negative impact of employees who resist change in the company structure. Leadership did not recognize the issue and it took longer to assimilate the two organizations.

[O Really]

People don't so much resist change as they resist being changed. Spend a little effort getting them on board with what you want to do, and most will support it if they also benefit from it.

This guy seems to be a bit of a "my way or the highway" jerk anyway. That type may show some success for a while but usually eventually crash and burn spectacularly, attracting a big crowd of people willing to toss more gas.

[supesalemgr2]

People don't so much resist change as they resist being changed. Spend a little effort getting them on board with what you want to do, and most will support it if they also benefit from it.

This guy seems to be a bit of a "my way or the highway" jerk anyway. That type may show some success for a while but usually eventually crash and burn spectacularly, attracting a big crowd of people willing to toss more gas.

I agree, but those that refuse to change are best let go.

[Vrede too]

People don't so much resist change as they resist being changed. Spend a little effort getting them on board with what you want to do, and most will support it if they also benefit from it.

This guy seems to be a bit of a "my way or the highway" jerk anyway. That type may show some success for a while but usually eventually crash and burn spectacularly, attracting a big crowd of people willing to toss more gas.

There's a lot to be said for the 'wisdom of the crowd', there are real and rational concerns about AI, and the article discusses alternative paths Nordic companies have chosen.

Is this CEO saying that he hired so very many slacker idiots in the first place? If so, that's on him and there's no reason to believe that his current strategies are any smarter.

[GoCubsGo]

Don't think the future is here yet.

No Waymo for me.

Passenger Forced to Flee Self-Driving Vehicle After It Stops in Path of an Oncoming Train

[Vrede too]

Don't think the future is here yet.

No Waymo for me.

Passenger Forced to Flee Self-Driving Vehicle After It Stops in Path of an Oncoming Train

Stephen King story?

Same. I try to not actively participate in putting people out of work. So far, I've even avoided Uber and Lyft. I like that cabbies have better employee protections and pay.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRRdC5RVf90

“I actually felt a little sorry for the car.”

I was hoping to see it get crushed.

[O Really]

Same. I try to not actively participate in putting people out of work. So far, I've even avoided Uber and Lyft. I like that cabbies have better employee protections and pay.

Most of my cab experience has been around NYC. Do cabbies elsewhere that have better employee protections and pay also speak English and have better attitudes? And I remember trying to flag a cab in Manhattan around 4:30p in the rain. Sorry, I'll stick with Uber. They can deal with their own pay/protection issues.

[Vrede too]

Most of my cab experience has been around NYC. Do cabbies elsewhere that have better employee protections and pay also speak English and have better attitudes? And I remember trying to flag a cab in Manhattan around 4:30p in the rain. Sorry, I'll stick with Uber. They can deal with their own pay/protection issues.

I don't have to flag cabs where I've been. I just call them.

[O Really]

Most of my cab experience has been around NYC. Do cabbies elsewhere that have better employee protections and pay also speak English and have better attitudes? And I remember trying to flag a cab in Manhattan around 4:30p in the rain. Sorry, I'll stick with Uber. They can deal with their own pay/protection issues.

I don't have to flag cabs where I've been. I just call them.

Yeah, I haven't been in a real cab in years. Have the taxi companies adopted similar systems to Uber where it tells you where yours is and gives the plate number of the car?

[Vrede too]

Yeah, I haven't been in a real cab in years. Have the taxi companies adopted similar systems to Uber where it tells you where yours is and gives the plate number of the car?

Location and rough ETA, yes. I'm sure they would give the plate number and name of the driver if I asked, but it's Hooterville and the cabs are marked.

[Vrede too]

Gmail AI is reading your emails — here is how to stop it
The Shark Tank star reveals exactly what information is being scanned and how to lock down your privacy.



When Judgement Day arrives our individual lives will already be well known to AI.

[O Really]

Not really AI per se, but seems related. Meta and Google are getting sued for making their platforms "attractive and addictive" to children.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/lan ... dia-begins

Plaintiffs have compared their claims to those that neutered the tobacco industry, but the tobacco case had one big point over this one: tobacco can be shown to be physically harmful at some level for every user and regardless of quantity. Social media and games would seem to be potentially harmful only to some, and whose over-use might have other contributing factors. That might be a big hurdle to leap.

Anyway, my question is this: If Meta and Google actually did what they're accused of, so what? Marketing people all over sit around in their conference rooms and say "what can we do to get more people to buy our product and use it more often?" Everybody wants an "attractive" product that sells well across different demographics and is enjoyed so much it becomes "addictive". Potato chip people claimed "nobody can eat just one."
The Wordle people seem to have the formula, too.

The broader question may be, is every company responsible for making a product that a person with an addictive personality or other issues won't want to use?

[Vrede too]

Not really AI per se, but seems related. Meta and Google are getting sued for making their platforms "attractive and addictive" to children.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/lan ... dia-begins

Plaintiffs have compared their claims to those that neutered the tobacco industry, but the tobacco case had one big point over this one: tobacco can be shown to be physically harmful at some level for every user and regardless of quantity. Social media and games would seem to be potentially harmful only to some, and whose over-use might have other contributing factors. That might be a big hurdle to leap.

Anyway, my question is this: If Meta and Google actually did what they're accused of, so what? Marketing people all over sit around in their conference rooms and say "what can we do to get more people to buy our product and use it more often?" Everybody wants an "attractive" product that sells well across different demographics and is enjoyed so much it becomes "addictive". Potato chip people claimed "nobody can eat just one."
The Wordle people seem to have the formula, too.

The broader question may be, is every company responsible for making a product that a person with an addictive personality or other issues won't want to use?

People look at it differently when harmful products are designed and marketed towards being addictive to children with their maturing brains. Should they? I lean toward Yes, but would pay rapt attention if I were on the jury.

TikTok and Snap already settled.

Aside, sort of: Meta and Google are so pervasive on the web and in our lives that I am for anything that takes them down a peg.

[supesalemgr2]

Not really AI per se, but seems related. Meta and Google are getting sued for making their platforms "attractive and addictive" to children.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/lan ... dia-begins

Plaintiffs have compared their claims to those that neutered the tobacco industry, but the tobacco case had one big point over this one: tobacco can be shown to be physically harmful at some level for every user and regardless of quantity. Social media and games would seem to be potentially harmful only to some, and whose over-use might have other contributing factors. That might be a big hurdle to leap.

Anyway, my question is this: If Meta and Google actually did what they're accused of, so what? Marketing people all over sit around in their conference rooms and say "what can we do to get more people to buy our product and use it more often?" Everybody wants an "attractive" product that sells well across different demographics and is enjoyed so much it becomes "addictive". Potato chip people claimed "nobody can eat just one."
The Wordle people seem to have the formula, too.

The broader question may be, is every company responsible for making a product that a person with an addictive personality or other issues won't want to use?

I agree with O Really. All successful business want to create a dependence for their product or service. Nothing wrong with that if those products and services are not harmful, like nicotine. Once again, parental and personal responsibility come into play.

[O Really]

The term "addicted" is overused, often misused, twisted past its clinical definition, but sometimes still descriptive:
Enjoy