It's not a clear-cut yes or no answer, but if I had to choose based on the current market trends and speculative investment behavior, I'd lean toward "yes, there are bubble-like conditions," but not necessarily a full-blown bubble yet.
Model collapse is the problem of financiers, whose inability to curate inputs renders bad outputs, the incestuousness and robbery problem.
We agree that that they won't improve, and the majority are not compelled to help them. It's a huckster's dream, and now it's time to wake up.
It's currently all true. AI is based on the scrape of hundreds of thousands of books (the subject of much litigation), web archives, web archives of paywalled sources obtained surrepticiously, and the delta of what happens with each new scrape.
I portend that humans already write for AI, and some might get paid.
[...] the new Representative from N. Mexico[...]
Arizona
The second sentence explains it perfectly fine to a layperson, and anyone used to interpreting plots has no real problem even without the supplied explanation. The only points of confusion for someone unfamiliar with the different models are the are the labels.
FIL has the old compromise of getting memory safety at the cost of a Garbage Collector. This is nothing new, and certainly not something that would compete with Rust.
This is mainly because institutions and systems that used to teach people how to do wisdom are lost. Modern age has information and tools to process it, but not the methods and practices to deal with bias and self-delusion,
Perhaps those railing against high schools, colleges, and even post-graduate education, need to go back and deal with their *own* biases and self-delusions. The institutions and systems are there.
This industry is starved of common sense.
The standards are weird, and poorly implemented.
Everyone wants to monetize, rather than simply enable astute appliance and home device use.
The haptic interface, where humans use things through a human feel, is great in some places, and entirely nonsensical in others.
No one wants your stupid browser ads, we want functionality. I paid for the fridge, if you show me ads on it, I'm going to toss you.
More features, product managers, are not better. We want long life from our investments in your stuff. People revert to the KISS principle because proprietary features break and cost money-- if the parts can be found by your insane service networks at all.
Your stuff has to work in harmony with our current investments. One maestro works, not a hundred musicians trying to play different music in our homes simultaneously; there are no good or empirical home control UIs that are consistent and thoughtful.
Smart home remains, therefore, an oxymoron unless you buy it from one vendor who doesn't stop supporting their stuff/versions after just three years.
Bottom line: Vendors have done this to themselves, forcing people back to the KISS principle-- keep it simple, stupid-- and stop adding so many features. Easy. But no product manager wants to think like this.
"Intelligence without character is a dangerous thing." -- G. Steinem