If it was intelligent, it would be making its own money by now.

"When we go down, we want to take down every market with us because we're a bottomless-money-pit and are chasing a dream that we can't achieve with all the world's computing resources, the training data of the entire Internet from billions of people, and excruciatingly overburdening several utilities to try to find something that we think will just magically happen if we keep throwing stuff at it. And we've used up every available money source but are still hundreds of billions in the red without any sign of profit, so we just need to tank everyone so that we can succeed"

I paid and still have a Disable Advertising button in Slashdot and this is YET ANOTHER time that that prior purchase is not being honoured.

All that would happen is that the companies would take the last version, continue using that in privately-patched versions that they never distribute (they don't need to, they only need to provide source if they're providing binaries and YouTube et al don't give you their binaries), and wait for someone else to start up a fork.

Additionally, they can't. If they change the licence, they can't build on what's already there as its GPL. It's literally in the design of the licence that they deliberately chose. You'd have to get the sign-off of thousands of previous contributors (some dead) or rebuild all the pieces of the software that they touched without any reference to their original code. It's not going to ever happen, same as the same argument for Linux etc. that people keep thinking they're being clever when they push it, not realising that it's designed deliberately so that it's forever open-source.

Sorry, but the only reasonable solution is to block their ability to submit a bug unless it comes from a human maintainer at Google, with a full patch and no AI slop inside it. And if they work around that ban them again. And if they work around that, stop accepting bug reports / patches as here.

I studied AI 25 years ago, thanks.

The consumer-grade technology being available clearly came about in the last 5 years.

Additionally, it's a technology which is going to - inevitably - significantly increases its costs. Being given away as a loss-leader against hundreds of billions of dollars or generation costs is going to come back to bite once you're reliant on it and have abandoned other things.

P.S. abandoning 60 years of traditional computer science for 5 years of ONLY MODERN AI (unless you're intending to teach kids about neural networks, etc.) is a dumb thing for an educational framework to do.

P.P.S. I work in schools. I work in IT.

P.P.P.S. We don't teach kids any real computer science at this age, what this is use COMPUTING - i.e. using a computer. Same difference as between literature and literacy, or maths and numeracy. Teaching AI as a base core subject intending to replace higher-level CS is... dumb.

No, they are dumb. Because it is obvious that this approach cannot work.

These Chinese EVs are hitting the market at $8,000-10,000 new. The cheapest EVs in the US currently are about 3 times as much with the average EVs 5-6 times higher. At those prices, the Chinese EVs would be wildly popular. They'd arguably hurt the US automakers, which is why we're not allowing them into the market today.

Irony or exceptionally naive statement? Difficult to say...

Simple: If it is slop and irrelevant, it still takes almost as much time to work on as a bug with high relevance. Google is overloading the projects engineering capabilities.

Like all other enterprises, Google is happy to take from the commons, but will not contribute unless publicly called out on it. As is happening here.

The problem is to discover whether it is AI slop or a real issue, you have to do 90% of the work anyways. Google is essentially doing a DoS attack on FFmpeg by delivering unvetted and often low-quality reports. Yes, that means the Google people behind this are _really_ dumb.

Very simple, although it is not a surprise YOU do, again, not get it: It requires most of the work, which is analysis, to find it is slop and slap that WONTFIX on it.

Indeed. Much of the school system is motivated by that. One of the reasons all good STEM courses have to teach _basics_ to their students, because school failed to do that.

Indeed. And after those years still being without any business model and not doing very well on quality or real-world potential.

Indeed. It is a clusterfuck and it will not do anything worthwhile. It will waste a lot of time and other resources though.