CosmoNova

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Well it's not like Micros- uhm I mean "Open"AI can complain. They're not going to open a can of worms about the whereabouts of datasets for LLMs.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Nintendo Wii/WiiU/DS/Switch did it better.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I totally agree. However, when looking at the bigger picture I think Microsoft wouldn't want to be so dependend on Epic after spending so much money on their game service, Bethesda and Activision/Blizzard. I don't expect them to actively consider switching engines and I don't think it would solve all that many problems anyway.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

On top of all of this, those efforts to tame and control outputs from the developer side could be abused to simply appease investors or totalitarian markets. So we might see a Disneyfication like we‘re seeing on other platforms like Youtube with their horrendous filters, spawning ridiculous terms like „unlifed“. And just imagine the level of censorship we‘d see if they ever try to get into the Chinese market because clearly, the ‚non‘ in non-profit is becoming more and more silent.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago

Aliens would be really disappointed to find out we already have blue checkmarks invented and people don‘t care nearly enough about it.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (10 children)

I think you misunderstand something. The same thing many AI enthusiasts and critics often choose to not understand. Regenerative AIs aren‘t just born from plain code and they don’t just imitate. They use a ton of data as reference points. It’s literally in the name of the technology.

You could claim „well maybe they used different voices and mixed them together“ but that is highly unlikely, given how much of a wild west approach most regenerative AI services have. it‘s more likely they used protected property here in a way it was not intended to be used. In which case SJ does indeed have a legal case here.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Very good first half of an article that I resonate with. The internet used to be a lot of small villages where oddballs were generally accepted or at least expected. Those villages have been abandoned and bulldozed to make place for Megacities lead by corporations and something was lost along the way. Everything has become a little bit more lonely and less organic.

Unfortunately the author seems to have hyperfocused on their small Twitter bubble a little too much if they didn‘t notice how the site has been a dumpster fire since 2015 in anticipation for the 2016 US presidential elections. Musk is not a turning point, just a continuation of where the site has been heading for a long time.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Youtube premium is a very short sighted band-aid solution. Because the more people sign up for it early, the more expensive and/or less convenient it will become later when the 'market is saturated' (meaning there's no one left who wants to sign up for it). When they can't grow their income through more users, they'll ramp up prices and shave off services. It's happening everywhere already and in the end you'll wish everyone advocated for adblockers a little more because by the time you're fed up with their pricing, it might already be too late to go back.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The fact that ‚Fucking‘ is literally written out on the map yet the creator still chose to censor themselves is fucking priceless.

[–] [email protected] 50 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It‘s laughable to expect corporations to act against their only purpose. As soon as a company sells shares it takes the route of infinite growth which is impossible. First they grow their user base and once they start to inevitably stagnate, they start milking their costumers, shaving off features and laying off workers in order to grow their income. It is really the only way for them to remain existent when the market is saturated. They cannot stay in business when they make billions a year when these billions aren‘t even more billions than last year. You can‘t attract new investors that way and therefore cannot continue to exist. Enshittyfication only just started. It cannot possibly get better when they can‘t expand their user base, only worse. They know they will self destruct eventually, but that doesn‘t matter as long as shareholders get their piece of the cake and jump ship to sink the next one. Just being a massively profitable company is bad business if you‘re not growing. That‘s the state of capitalism we‘re in.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

Google‘s ‚auto complete‘ is driving me nuts sometimes and it‘s also prevalent on Youtube. I mean just scrolling through completely unrelated suggestions in Youtube‘s search results tells you how little they care to show you what you actually want and rather something that makes them more money one way or another. But the direct fiddling with actual search quarries is just malpractice for a search engine.

[–] [email protected] 65 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Twitter made Trump win in 2016. Like, did people seriously forget about „Trump tweeted“ headlines that dominated daily news for years? The same news that would then claim a small obscure website like 4Chan made Trump president single-handedly. I mean I almost can‘t blame you for memory holing those years, but claiming Twitter wasn‘t absolute dog water before Musk is simply wrong.

view more: next ›