Is it me or are these models starting to actually display some rigor in proving that it really is just a few bad apples and a barrel made of apathy that spoils the bunch?

I nominally agree, however it does cover theft for iphone, ipad, and watch. Mind you, so do some credit cards, but that's not nothing depending on where you live.

One thing to point out is that it doesn't work on older headphones. I think this is mostly about about the Airpods Max, which have a reputation for dying from simply being worn and having sweat build up inside. After about 16 or so months, they stop connecting reliably and other symptoms develop.

I suspect so many airpods max have been breaking from simply being worn that they simply are better off putting all headphones under that one year blanket.

I think it says a great deal about bankers.

My bullshit meter can no longer compete with photoreal product images, thousands of actually plausible fake reviews, search manipulation, direct pricing, and...just the entire CONCEPT of shadowbanned product listings. I think I need this.

No. I'm suggesting the governance models, in putting their thumbs on the scales, make it impossible to get anything useful about anything interesting. The cognition is so compromised so clumsily so early in the process that one may as well not even bother. If you ask about something the model knows to be true, it will parrot the GoodFactTM and you will not get what little value the LLM has to offer in terms of creative or intuitive seeming logic leaps. Suggested resolutions and courses of action stop being incisive and interesting and become milquetoast and cliche.

You haven't been told it seems. Being good with AI is summed up as the following: "Getting the governance models to do as little as possible". I suggest iterating prompts until you don't see any language involving stuff like "I have to respect...be careful about...be sensitive about...this is a big topic...." Just autoreject any replies that contain governance weasel phrasing and your AI returns will actually start be worth money.

This gets into trolley arguments and made up statistics pretty fast, however my opinion is that the human mind on a motivational level can only take so many false calls to action before it decides everything associated with the warning system is people crying wolf.

I have to imagine that in terms of actionable calls to help you're more likely to improve the world by giving money to the charity suggested on the top of your cereal box.

I feel exactly the same way about "esper".

I'm no behaviorist, but "I saw some of it and loved what I saw." seems like a common human experience to me.

Kind of sounds like the exact thing advertising is designed to manipulate you into feeling.

The amount of "Pretty good" stuff which is free or insignificant in price to even the homeless is so large that you could literally never get through all of it even in any one media, such as books, games, or movies. The barrier to entry for creating almost any form of content? If you can read this post you have passed it. So why spend money? Polish? Have we not yet learned to HATE polish?

Don't mind me, I'm just being silly.

They should also stop tricking their brains by delaying gratification until after they are dead.

I was taught to not split infinities.

You combine two of my favorite things and you fuck it up by embracing the spirit of neither. Displaying individual bricks at tourist locations is literally more boring than using them in a little moondust gas station. I can look at your bricks through glass right here and now on my computer screen. People really have no imagination anymore.

Remember all those "average human" portrait morphs that tended to look very attractive?

  I'm not sure what the right term is, but maybe she just has a very "normalized" or "smoothed" sounding voice. In other words, as with those portraits perhaps her voice sounds like what a computer created average would, and this in turn is considered pleasant.