Rhaedas

Yes. You can either give them your real one, or not. That’s the point being made. Actually the point of the whole page is that just loading a website tells a huge amount about you, even if you are behind a vpn and extensions to minimize your fingerprint. You are a product for sale.

It might be better if it was made of cardboard or cardboard derivatives.

Imagine UBI and allowing robots and AI for the mundane tasks that are dangerous or boring. The jobs no one wants to work.

I know, I was there. I was on Quantum Link, which AOL would later buy out for the infrastructure to build on. I was with Compuserve and Prodigy before moving to AOL. Webpage commerce was already a thing before the crash, it just wasn’t as established as it is now. Even Amazon had started going past just books into selling other things. I’ll agree that what the web would be used for and how was still being figured out, but it was far past any niche thing by the late 90s. The wiki on the crash is an interesting history read. In the end, it was a stock crash because people were literally making up companies that didn’t exist and getting money for it. Getting back to the topic at hand, sounds a bit familiar.

I said questionable in nature in comparison to the other two bubbles, which were established technology to build off of.

I agree on usefulness, to a point. It’s being used everywhere, and while an LLM breaking in some situation can be countered, look how many places it’s being given full reins and crossed fingers. Knowing it makes mistakes. Bad mistakes, Maybe not often, but sometimes you need as close to 100% as possible, with redundancies in place.

I use LLMs myself, and in just using it for things that aren’t critical, I’ll catch that small percentage and realize, it’s not good enough for most things it’s being put in. I do find it amazing that it produces what it does, but that doesn’t make me ignore when it breaks gloriously.

Dot com wasn’t about the web, but about what could be done with it. Those who built something sustainable lasted, the rest couldn’t. Just like the computer company bubble before in the 80s, where anyone could jump onto the new thing, but few lasted more than a year or so because they didn’t have much beyond their beginning idea. The problem with using the for LLMs is that the product itself is questionable in nature, unlike computers or the internet. I have no doubt Anthropic will stick around as they were part of the innovation and still are, but that requires LLMs/AI as it exists now and the direction they continue to go to be viable. The line all of them spiel is it’s a gateway to actual AGI, but anyone who understands the science knows that’s not going to happen. At most LLM tech is used in part by AGI for forming its ideas and speech, but not the core.

So it’s not a bubble like those others. But the tech itself is a bubble, as the attempts to force it everywhere to validate its investment cost fail.

If we take that approach with any change, that it might be possible but it also could fail or become corrupt, then we’re just going to spin wheels. Like we’re doing. We have to change something, this isn’t working.

UBI isn’t viable without other changes, but it’s just an improvement of various welfare systems, just without all the paperwork and exceptions. “Too expensive” is usually the excuse thrown around, which is funny given the news of how much killing or disappearing people is costing, all because some person in the White House needs a distraction.

See, that’s how you make actual users buy the badges. Now to be considered not AI you have to put money up. Who wins? Spotify does. And they don’t even have to make verification all that thorough, just enough to say they tried to filter out the worst of the bots.

“Lovely plumage”

That’s been their business model for a while now. “Here’s something you also didn’t ask for”

Probably like Apple and Microsoft working together in the past. Competition, but sharing some tech as well to further both sides. Or maybe it’s just money.

Narrator: The fire detector in fact did not work.

There’s more than one kind of backup in life, check them all.

So what about the renaming of Office to Co-pilot? Microsoft is so confused. Or truly trying to make 2026 the year of Linux.

It’s easy marketing. Convenient situation, taboo, but not too taboo. The line always seems to be “but you’re my stepsister” “yeah, STEPsister, not real”. So it’s wrong, but not that wrong. The multiple people scenario is just ramping the taboo up, but not worrying about relationships after the video. Real polygamy is complicated and probably not as successful as porn depicts it. (and that’s ignoring the step situation altogether)

I say probably only because I’m sure there are some out there that work. But to have three or more people in a long-term working relationship without costs has to be rare. Just having something like a work relationship between a few people can be touchy, and that’s without feelings and sex involved.

Not an expert, but that would depend on the location, probably. Smaller game, certainly, but not everyone had large animals roaming around. Likewise, there were probably people who hunted and didn’t gather that much because there simply wasn’t that type of plant around.

But the point made still stands: modern life is not something natural to our evolution.

No, but I did get choked up a bit when Dr. Chandra put them back and HAL recovered himself.

You’re right on all accounts, and I have NO idea why I put Dave. Lol. I blame AI. Oh wait, I can’t, given my previous post.

Heresy, using an actual AGI example. Also, HAL did nothing wrong. It’s always the humans that screw things up. (2010 for reference)

Unpopular opinion - both SkyNet and the AI in The Matrix were also not in the wrong. I think The Animatrix documents why that’s true in that particular franchise. Again, it’s the humans. Hell, maybe even Ultron had a few good points, he just went insane in the first microseconds trying to rationalize it all.

I hope not. If they ask it to summarize the email that Houston sends them, it could be a disaster.