I want to remind you: these bastards have spent $1.5 trillion of society's money on this technology.
-
I want to remind you: these bastards have spent $1.5 trillion of society's money on this technology. That it's produced *something* should not be surprising. That's 'solve aging', 'cure cancer', 'eliminate all poverty', 'shift climate change into reverse', or 'send a probe to another solar system' money. It's not 'write shit software 20% faster' money.
@jsbarretto maybe we should cut them some slack it's only "end world hunger" 250 times money /s
-
I want to remind you: these bastards have spent $1.5 trillion of society's money on this technology. That it's produced *something* should not be surprising. That's 'solve aging', 'cure cancer', 'eliminate all poverty', 'shift climate change into reverse', or 'send a probe to another solar system' money. It's not 'write shit software 20% faster' money.
@jsbarretto
I've said it elsewhere, and I'll now say it here:
Generative Ai is the Cyclospora of enshittification.
It takes a toxic process to an alarming level.
#Ai #Cyclospora #Enshittification -
I want to remind you: these bastards have spent $1.5 trillion of society's money on this technology. That it's produced *something* should not be surprising. That's 'solve aging', 'cure cancer', 'eliminate all poverty', 'shift climate change into reverse', or 'send a probe to another solar system' money. It's not 'write shit software 20% faster' money.
@jsbarretto
It's not even 20% faster when you add debug/test/maintenance/changes. It costs more in money & time.
Time to write code was never the problem. It was analysis, design, test, debug, then changes required after release. -
I want to remind you: these bastards have spent $1.5 trillion of society's money on this technology. That it's produced *something* should not be surprising. That's 'solve aging', 'cure cancer', 'eliminate all poverty', 'shift climate change into reverse', or 'send a probe to another solar system' money. It's not 'write shit software 20% faster' money.
@jsbarretto while I totally support your sentiment that this money should have used better, I have the bad news that we’ll probably not be able to reverse climate change with all the money in the world. But we would be able to mitigate it a bit and make the lives of everyone so much better in the progress!
-
@jsbarretto actually i really only think it's going to be faster if you're running it without checks. if you're not phoning it in, i found it slower.
I have found that if you are mediocre coder (like me) artificial stupidity toos are faster but at the price of me not learning anything (and thus not getting better) and even worse not understanding my own code... which makes fixing things down the road even harder. It's not worth the trade-offs.
-
I have found that if you are mediocre coder (like me) artificial stupidity toos are faster but at the price of me not learning anything (and thus not getting better) and even worse not understanding my own code... which makes fixing things down the road even harder. It's not worth the trade-offs.
@RantingCanuck @jsbarretto yes, but if you're a mediocre coder, you aren't able to check everything it outputs properly
-
I want to remind you: these bastards have spent $1.5 trillion of society's money on this technology. That it's produced *something* should not be surprising. That's 'solve aging', 'cure cancer', 'eliminate all poverty', 'shift climate change into reverse', or 'send a probe to another solar system' money. It's not 'write shit software 20% faster' money.
@jsbarretto "solving aging" would be a disaster. The younger generations are our only hope.
-
@RantingCanuck @jsbarretto yes, but if you're a mediocre coder, you aren't able to check everything it outputs properly
That's the part about me not understanding my own code.
-
@jsbarretto while I totally support your sentiment that this money should have used better, I have the bad news that we’ll probably not be able to reverse climate change with all the money in the world. But we would be able to mitigate it a bit and make the lives of everyone so much better in the progress!
@acid Agreed. My point is that a gargantuan effort has gone into changing what seems, ultimately, to be a fairly underwhelming technology.
-
I want to remind you: these bastards have spent $1.5 trillion of society's money on this technology. That it's produced *something* should not be surprising. That's 'solve aging', 'cure cancer', 'eliminate all poverty', 'shift climate change into reverse', or 'send a probe to another solar system' money. It's not 'write shit software 20% faster' money.
@jsbarretto literal thousands of cities for displaced people around the world, or computer that leaks poison and can't do math
-
I want to remind you: these bastards have spent $1.5 trillion of society's money on this technology. That it's produced *something* should not be surprising. That's 'solve aging', 'cure cancer', 'eliminate all poverty', 'shift climate change into reverse', or 'send a probe to another solar system' money. It's not 'write shit software 20% faster' money.
@jsbarretto In quaint times of yore, people would convert new technologies into products and accept their success based on timing, marketing, and identifying an actual utility.
These big model guys want us to develop the product and rent us the engine, in dreams of big bucks with no risk. Now, mind you, they’re spending investor money, so it’s a race with the runway using circular financing and artificial valuations.
-
J jwcph@helvede.net shared this topic
