To be fair to them (not really)

The first, original xbox was pentium 3 733 with a mere 64mb of DDR. It also had an 8Gb system image, the footprint of which never changed even a decade later when nobody was making disks that small any more.

Xboxes are really just returning to their roots, PCs with cast plastic cases with a target market of people who don't really know any better.

Has he considered resolving this by not trying to add more 'value' to a functional tool?

Discord used to be usable for actually organising things. Not just game or streamer communities oriented around turning their members into revenue streams... I knew of several academic and union groups that used Discord as their primary platform during the pandemic, with Zoom only used when they had to go through their university's infrastructure for whatever reason.

  Now it is oriented towards making the most intrusive emoji possible. Serious people no longer use it, already.

I remember being able to look up technical details on google without my search being autocorrected halfway through the process, not in the way I specified that I wanted it treated based on their documented search syntax... I don't even know if the syntax they have listed is valid, because nothing seems to stop it getting overridden these days.

They have undermined their core business for people who actually do work necessary work, and it's really not helpful having my searches constantly reinterpreted into something that would be more convenient for their advertising business than what I actually want.

Further, how are they going to... dissipate heat?

is that why they keep adding random things that appear in my home and subs menus that i don't even mouse over to my watch history, as complete views?

Half joking.

Maybe he could get that spokeslady with the billionaire husband to explain that there were bad materials in the childrens section of the copyright office.

Yeah but that's only the positive scenario. There were a lot of ways a person could be exploited in feudalism that don't really exist in the modern world, but most of those situations were considered normal or necessary.

Admittedly we still have wage slavery, and many of its proponents will likely tell you without irony that the common man has no work ethic because they're not cynically exploiting the system for their own benefit like a smart person would... right after explaining to you that they shouldn't have to understand the math themselves... but I still think the medieval experience was probably worse.

Honey.

You started from the position that I wouldn't accept that my perception was regurgitated horseshit, and yet you kept appealing to what I believe... on the clear premise that you already knew what I believed and had an argument to educate me about why I was wrong.

Why would it matter what I believed there when I can just test where something's efficiency sits on the big O scale...? Why would it EVER matter?

We are not the same.

You explained that you were very confident that you were correct in your analysis about my perceptions of what an LLM is, and then missed every piece of evidence that was given to you that your analysis wasn't as good as you thought. That's how we got here.

Have a nice day.

You still haven't addressed the possibility that you did actually completely miss the point I was making, have you?

When you, as a professional, fail to build a system that performed to specification because of unpredictable behavior... whose business will that affect?

Do you think explaining to your customer that it should be possible to do the thing they want, when the system is in the process of doing things it never thought of as being possible and therefore has no process to contain... some businesses will just write that off and not seek damages, right...?

How about this. How about you DON'T update your insurance, and we come back and talk about this in 10 years?

Ok point taken. It's possible to write transformers and understand nothing about the implications of how they work. It's possible to graduate from college and believe one knows the extents of what's necessary for building reliable processes.

It's possible to think of oneself as knowledgeable and then rhetorically ask why someone is using engineering terms one isn't familiar with, and reveal in the process that one isn't familiar with them.

Can you please explain why you think imitating eliza by doing rogerian therapy or imitating a socratic method to someone who has written transformers directly proves something...? Do you think your audience is ignorant of the things you are trying to convey, and if so, what would be the point of using this methodology to try to relate them?

You're very funny and I hope you win many purely verbal arguments on the internet... I guess?

I hope you don't believe you understand what a production system is though, based on that response.

Because the entire thing is promo to make it look like there's a point to humanoid robots in an industrial setting, probably.

As you say, unless it can be demonstrated that using a generalist platform is more efficient across a variety of tasks than using specific systems for each task... this is just not going to be a thing in the real world.

I don't know what's better... the idea that you're just correct, or the idea that a lot of it was always there and it's just being exposed now as communication improves across society.

I do, sadly, see your point though.