"It did not impact compute, storage, database, AI technologies, or any other of the hundreds of services that we run."
"We save that for February 29th + 365, or as we call it...*CRASH*"

Depends what part of the business, don't you think? That sort of works in IT if I need to know a solution or remember a command that I can vet the answer on. I don't think the sales department should be using AI very much. I'd prefer we just hire salesmen who aren't lazy and know how to read and write at a proper level. Data analytics teams should probably implement it somehow but they're not exactly using pen and paper at the moment and I doubt they like inaccuracies and hallucinations.
I just had CoPilot tell me my word document was about historic events because it thought 2/19/26 meant 1926. It is getting in my way on a daily basis. So it's also not a good product and people know it.

In my experience, they're either not going to do it 100% of the time or they're lying and the employees will use AI to review what AI wrote.

Look at the post history of this use and see if you notice a pattern.

I already knew the answer but I asked Chat GPT instead because it's way funnier:
If a newspaper replaces its human writers with AI and publishes an article with a hallucinated and defamatory statement about a person, would they be liable for that?
Yes — in most jurisdictions, the newspaper would likely still be legally liable for defamatory statements published under its name, even if the content was generated by AI

That's funny, because I read on slashdot recently that it's not improving productivity at all, in a recent widespread study. Let's just cut the shit. It will eliminate call center/chat support jobs because it can read KBs and a script and flow chart too, probably better. Most of those jobs are farmed out to overseas. Right this second I'm updating documentation on rack unit spacing in all IDFs and replacing a laptop fan. Yeah, I'm so scared AI will take my white collar job.
That Andrew Yang guy has some pretty cooky ideas by the way. I think that's why they mentioned UBI out of nowhere for no reason, just so the reader has context. Anyone with a brain can look at socialist hippie communes and Native American reservations and determine UBI isn't a great idea and doesn't work that well in the long run.

Because every time your body produces a protein, there is a danger there. That is how mutations and various disorders start. There's a big difference between human cell division and tricking your cell into making a protein that resembles a virus but compare that to the traditional method. They make a virus via normal replication, disable it, then inject it. Your body sees the surface proteins and makes antibodies them remembers that protein sequence. Simple, effective, safer because the virus makes viruses, not your body attempting to create viruses. And you can check the validity of the proteins for aberrations BEFORE injecting into someone.

Monoclonal antibodies is so much more effective and direct than this roundabout mRNA nonsense, THAT is what they should be pursuing. Looking at public documents about what they're spending on, it sure and hell isn't mRNA research anymore. My immune system is too damn slow. I want to spit in a machine, have it find out what the pathogen is, make an antibody, clone it, inject it, and kill all the pathogens without harming any other tissue. It was miracle cure level for COVID and needs to be pursued because I want that future!

We'll study it further to see if it's dangerous once it reaches the market? But it's fine because we're testing it on old people so if there's a long term bad effect, they'll die anyway. WHAT? Gee, I wonder why the FDA took issue with that.

This is whiny propaganda from a failing industry propped up by paranoid lefties and angry vegans. The truth is they bypassed A LOT of food and drug testing because it's just meat. It's an existing animal and existing product. Okay, prove to me that it won't cause prion disorders, the cells didn't mutate while being grown, and the molecular makeup is 100% identical and won't degrade into a poison or contain an exotic, unexpected compound. You can't because you didn't test for it and just want to sell it. So that's going to be a no from me until it goes through the same scrutiny as a prescription drug.

Vegans don't want a solution. They want to act superior, be angry, and have someone to yell at so they feel better about themselves. That's why they have immensely higher rates of mental illness. It has nothing to do with animals and everything to do with being an asshole and negative personality traits.

And self driving and fusion too!
MS just lost $0.7 trillion by chasing AI bullshit that nobody wants to they're not exactly a reliable source for this prediction.

Lazy people who can't read or spell saying that it ups their productivity is not necessarily unbiased.

Well, yeah, the EXISTING ones. The top ones that have been there. I use AI to tell me how to do some obscure windows OS thing solely because I can vet the answer and verify it's correct. The same goes for talented coders. 20 years from now when nobody knows how to actually read and test code, it'll be a huge problem.

YOU can't do it, but the government can because they're here to protect you, of course.