There was one when amazon did the same. In favor of amazon…
I think the dumbfuck judge said it was merely ‘modification of benefits, so it doesnt count’, or some shit along those lines. This probably the reason why more companies do it now.
Yep. When the business loses, it’s not their money, but when there are profits, it’s suddenly all theirs.
Yep. There was probably like a month of his daddy not being able to send money because of opening a bank account after moving or something, which is why he is now larping as “i was so poor”
OpenAI had the same playbook.
Maybe they get a hint of how regular people feel daily with these companies around, but that would require self-reflection.
A criminal living in a jail? Truly revolutionary stuff
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Never understood the hate for it. I get that it’s not everyone’s cup of tea, but the hate is just so over the top. Like a joke that people took too seriously. Is it because pineapple is sweet? But there are so many sweet toppings and condiments for Pizza. There is probably more sugar in the doe than in a few slices of pineapple in some countries. Do the same people hate Toast Hawaii as well?
This will be the way for me going forward building storage and library. I’d rather don’t watch something than watch with ads.
The woman in the stock photo looks like she’s about to pilot an X-Wing.
Thank you for your thorough explanation, kind human.
I always have to laugh when someone argues that CEOs should make million and billions because “they have all the risk”. What risk? As CEO, you can virtually ram a billion dollar company into the ground, and the worst that will happen to you is a multimillion dollar severance package.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Similar for me. What i find ironic is that AI already ran into a brick wall. It’s inherent statelessness by design means that AI is unlikely to be suited for anything more than isolated well defined tasks in the near future. Still usable as a tool, but without someone who is actually experienced, it will result in disaster.
and even in smaller tasks it can fucks up, especially if the person prompting it is incapable of writing the code themselves as they don’t know how to properly design it and don’t spot the issues. Like everything with AI, it looks impressive at first glance until you look at it for more than 10 seconds and spot the metaphorical 6th finger.
What we see currently with AI getting “better” at coding is more or less duct tape to make it work. Basically, they create the agents to bolt on the state, more layers between user and model. Iterative processes to make the answers better, etc, and to create “memory”, which in essence is just an ever growing prompt managed by the agent. But in the end, this won’t fix the inherent problem, so it will only do so much and is already hitting another ceiling. It introduces state decay. With the agent method its not really possible to “take away” memory, so if you gave it multiple versions of the same code (as you would if you work with AI), the AI never really forgets about old code. It can supress it through agent instructions (more duct tape), but the more there is the more it bleeds through, which can make the AI reintroduce old code or base assumptions on outdated things.
There is no fix without changing the inherent way how models work, which would introduce complexity beyond what is currently feasible in computing (and the current AI is already gobbling up all computing reaoureces as is)
deleted by creator
I’m the polar opposite with my brain telling me to say something, but I keep quiet