I fully expect, if somebody hasn't already done it, somebody is going to find a way to work AI into smart glasses such that you'll be able to nudify people on the fly as you're walking around. Cyber Nudism. Somebody is going to take that old speech advice literally, "Just imagine everybody is in their underwear."

I've never thought about it like a cult, but I would probably include myself in there (though my membership recently lapsed, so I'm a bad CostCultist apparently). I don't like to sing the praises of mega-corporations and companies, but I do think that companies that show good behavior should be rewarded. Many of the things that Costco does are things that I think other companies should also be doing, so if I have a choice between multiple vendors selling essentially the same thing, I'm going to give my money to the one who I agree with the most on a personal level.

I've got a Steam Index and I've seen how much VR has improved in the past few years, but the Vision Pro seems half-baked and overly expensive for what it provides. I still hope it improves and gets better, but $3500 for what they're offering is a bridge too far for me. At the moment, it really seems like the target market for this is Youtuber influencers and tech reviewers. The biggest thing I'm looking forward to this year is the new Steam Frame, Valve somehow doing what the 2nd biggest company in the world could not. More money apparently does not make a company have better ideas. I think the eventual future we'll see with VR headsets is a sort of portable holodeck, where they're married up with AI being able to generate visuals on the fly. Maybe even some sort of VR/AR thing where users with headsets will be able to "re-skin" reality into whatever we want it to be.

If OpenAI already has those numbers (0.07%), that probably means they're monitoring all the chats with ChatGPT (which was already a given). On the one hand, they could act on that information (which maybe they already do in extreme cases?), maybe information gets forwarded to the proper authorities, and somebody comes to check on the person. However, do I want to live in a world where AI chats can prompt a visit by a police officer for a wellness check or something, just because something I typed out sounded kind of weird to an AI algorithim? There's likely way more false positives and/or false negatives I feel like that would come up from that than anything. I remember a few months back trying to write out some crazy stuff, just to see if I could get the AI to join in on it and reinforce the ideas, but it didn't take the bait, it kept suggesting I get help. Though it did indulge me in a creative writing exercise to rewrite the Bible as if AI was a new religion and it went all in on that. So I don't even know how anyone accounts for that, for prompts that sound like creative writing, but it's actually the person going crazy.

Grok's greatest strength appears to be that they trained it on porn and it's #1 use is most likely as a porn generator, otherwise, I'm not sure what other AI niche it really fulfills, and it apparently fulfills even that function poorly.

I think we potentially have the MCU to blame for that. Iron Man 2 (2010) created this pop-culture association between fictional billionaire/fictional genius Tony Stark and real billionaire/fictional genius Elon Musk that alot of people associated Musk with being a "real world Tony Stark" for a long time before his ass-hatery became too completely obvious the more he opened his mouth.

I had found myself using ChatGPT increasingly over the past few months, but then just started backing away from it recently because of how censored the model feels. Even mundane requests that I've left to ChatGPT to take the lead on, with it prompting me with a dozen or so different questions about what it shoud do, will oftentimes end with it saying, "Sorry, I can't do that for you." And I'm just left frustrated like, "Ok, just do whatever the F you can do, I don't care, you've already wasted my time." Or trying to schedule tasks for it to do is so ridiculously painful, with no controls to fine-tune anything. Or just plain inconsistentsies between chats, it's just so incredibly frustrating to work with sometimes. It tells you what you thinks you want to hear but then endlessly doesn't do the things it's supposed to do. I actually hated the idea of using Grok and hate Elon Musk even more, but found myself switching to that for some tasks because it didn't throw up as many complaints as ChatGPT. I am curious to see how the "adult ChatGPT" offering ends up being, but if that is still more work than it's worth, I'd just end up canceling my $20 subscription to it, as it's really not been worth it for the few months I've had it. I've probably ended up moving to going back and forth between the different models anymore though, depending on what the task is. ChatGPT is kind of just a general purpose chat bot, image generation usually ends up being a waste of time. For anything that requires a bit more heavy lifting or less guardrails, I'll use whatever else. None of them are really great for "serious work", but they come in handy here and there with random projects.

I'm assuming he just saw Wrath of Khan recently and that's where the name came from.

Which episode of Big Bang Theory did this come up in?

I think it's underwhelming because the terminology isn't matching up with what they're trying to push it as. They keep trying to push it as being close to human intelligence or trying to get people scared about an AI Apocalypse or super intelligence or whatever, but it's nowhere near being able to do anything like that. If anything, all of this "AI" stuff is an evolution of search engines and autofill (though the image and video generation stuff is getting pretty good, albeit censored).

I just asked it earlier to generate a simple Excel file, something I should think that a Microsoft AI should... excel at, and the excel file was broken, unusuable. The one thing I would think it would be good at and it failed.

By far the worst one I've ever encountered is on Roblox. I have a parent account for my kids and whenever they inevitably have account problems I absolutely hate it and usually have to do a captcha for something or other. It's something like 10 really annoying captchas that you actually have to take some amount of time on. Half the time I quit out because I'm in a hurry and didn't realize I needed to dedicate that much time on it. That probably makes it more secure than any other site, but my kids still claim that there's so many hackers and bots on it (they're 8 year olds, just regurgitating whatever roblox youtubers are saying).

It's never enough for any of these people.

Since all of that data comes entirely from posts by users, can reddit itself claim to own any of the information that they have on their website (outside of whatever stupid TOS crap they have that says whatever you post is theirs)? Since the public are by and large the originators of all of their content, it's not like they put in the work for that content that Perplexity and others are scraping. The bigger issue it seems like is the lack of attribution, with Perplexity and others frequently not citing where the information comes from. Can't they just build the A.I.s to cite their sources whenever it outputs something that has a definite source, or are we past all that since they've already used all this content as training data already.

an advertisement than a warning.