My guess is we will see some less convenient models, that gives better result but a “weird” way ; and far more very convenient models, easy to use, but that generate advertisings as a result (maybe even with promo codes!)…
Remember how internet search have evolved, how youtube has became, how everything went when finance guys decided it was time for harvest…
Now look at this new field, see how they grow it… what are the odds their plan is to harvest it at some point?
We are not yet at the point LLM are so dependent on advertising and “partnerships” that they are totally biased in favor of specific brands… not yet…
Take a time to anticipate how the actual state will soon be regreted…
Oh yes we are young! And since no less than 40 years! ^^
For sugar, it seems to be more effective than cocain if you want to make some food addictive…
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0000698
I am a big fan of other theories answering the question. Yet also, both being trans and using linux come with a way of thinking where you accept to challenge the “one per default” solution, in order to find something better even if it is less comfortable at first.
So trans people are likely to use linux, BSD, (maybe Hurd) or other system that matched their needs. Because they value more the reality than the convenience. They know very well the social incentives to do as “normal people” do, but they can’t make it to lie to themselves well enough to pretend it would be ok to do as if it was ok.
At some point, most cis genders using linux are transgenders who happen to be born with some genitalia that fit their mind: their hardware got delivered with their favorite operating system, so they don’t need to install nor to set a dual boot ; but they feel so after considering different options and making their own choice.
It is fun for me… I am a crazy fool developper and most real software professionals tell me I am dumb to think that a mistake should lead to something else than an error that kills the program (and wait for user’s restart).
So, yes, I agree with you, out it won’t happen as long as makers trust deprivating software makers (those who make softwares no one else may modify).
Imagine if you could make it watch advertising for your earnings… But yes, it would need the softwares belong to you, rather than to the washing machine’s maker…
Why not rename tap water to “gazoline”?
Economical books of Lenin may also be of interest, Henri Ford studied them while he never was a communist. It is a bit harder to read than the manifesto of Marx and Engels, but it doesn’t require to be an economist.
I do not think a ban would be efficient. It would just force those who use AI to dissimulate it. I see it a bit as drug use, banning hasn’t solved the problem ; and the countries who handled it the best were those regulating the use.
So I think we should look for a good regulation. It is more complicated to set up, but it has a chance to work.
In my mind, it should allow some projects to identify as not using any AI, and request that each project define what is their use of AI. Ideally, we could know this without opening the project (maybe thanks to a badge).
Also, shaming the use of AI only has the same aim as banning it: forcing it to grow hiden and out of control.
no, you need to make the AI drink enough wine so it doesn’t hallucinate ; and it is a truth know since antiquity: if you drawn the datacenters electronic components into wine, there are no more AI hallucination… try it!
Old latin wise people used to say “in vino veritas”, the truth is in the wine… and so it is likely to harm crypto and security… if we accept mythology as a reliable source…
Wine is to be drank, not to pour on your computer!
Scaned ID will never be targeted by hackers in order to set up some massive identity fraud, right? Or even if they try, the vibe coded online verification would be so secured that it is impossible for hackers to steal the datas, for once, isn’t it?
Who could already tell that it would be a massive security breach?
Future keep so big surprises for us ̂ ̂
They are the powerful people, and they know why they don’t want to be kept accountable.