I own, but do not operate, a few IT companies that manage corporations in the $600MM-$1B receivables range.

Based on our own help desk ticket software, our clients have opened 40% fewer tickets since ChatGPT was rolled out to every desk and phone. 40%. I expect another 40% drop (total 80%) by next year as end users just manage things themselves.

I won't downsize as the tickets aren't really generating revenue as much as headaches. One of my engineers had a broken PDF file that took her 6 hours to fix, and the end user spent 6 days trying to fix it themselves with Ai.

But -- the basic stuff? Reboot your computer stuff? Email rejected because you mistyped a domain name stuff?

You don't need a human, and we would probably have outsource that stuff to India anyway next year if not for ChatGPT etc.

I spend quite a bit on Discord server services, but I'm out.

GFY, Discord and governments, for mandating this bullshit nonsense.

Talking to people in public isnâ(TM)t harassment.

Talking to people on taxpayer funded grounds also isnâ(TM)t trespass.

Tax funded?

Not private property anymore.

Pfff. The magnitude of the mathwank projection of quantum gravity is even slightly larger than that of string theory[1]. It's just that being so easy to point out the reasonable shortcomings of string theory distracts from Mme SH's underlying message of "their mathwank is crowding out grant money from my mathwank."

Don't get me wrong, I think the GP's "mathwank" label is ... tricky. Theoretical Math is a Good Thing. Theoretical Physicists trying to come up with Mathematical models for things are also a Good Thing. Abusing a Good Thing is a Bad Thing though, and some of the physicists in these fields are doing that. So yeah, mathwank.

[1] some approaches developed in some corners of string theory (which is a ... wide net with many corners) turned out to be useful for modeling other things in Physics that have direct connection with experiments (and hence no connection with string theory).

This is retarded.

1. It isn't for profit healthcare that is the problem, it's THIRD PARTY PAY.
2. I don't use third party pay, ever, for healthcare. I've been insured nonstop for over 30 years, and NEVER ONCE has my insurer paid my doctor.
3. Even when I've had emergencies, I still called around, negotiated a fair cash up front rate, paid cash up front, and billed it to my insurer. My cash up front rate was sometimes below any co-pay negotiated with my insurer, lol.

I just recently had some elective surgery that would have cost me about $2000 on my annual deductible, but I was able to cash pay a negotiated rate of $400 including a follow-up "free". I submitted the $400 to my insurer and they reimbursed me.

Third party insurance exists because YOU VOTERS demanded the HMO Act of the 1970s, which tied health care to employment, and then employers outsourced it to third parties.

Health care is remarkably cheap in the US (cash pay, negotiated) and I don't have to wait months to see a doctor when I call and say I am cash pay. They bump me up fast.

Nah.

Iâ(TM)m 51. Iâ(TM)ve had health insurance continuously for 35 years and have used it exactly ZERO TIMES.

I am self pay. For everything but true life threatening emergencies, which Iâ(TM)ve had zero.

Even the ER is cheaper when negotiated self pay.

My urologist is stunned that I pay $85 for his visits. Self pay. Including labs. My colleague goes to the same urologist and his insurance pays $550 for the same visit and naturally it comes out of his deductible lol.

Insurance is a scam. All insurance is legal gambling and gamblers never win.

Supply and demand dictate this is exactly the case.

If something is valuable to everyone, it should only be accessible to those who have enough saved value to acquire it.

The poor fucked themselves. My parents are poor but worked hard so I wouldn't be.

Being compensated for it means it wonâ(TM)t get wasted and will always have a fair valuation.

Compensation is as cooperative as it comes because nobody can hoard it.

It would be amazing if there was a document that stated in very clear terms just how limited our federal government is and what it can't do at all no matter what.

You should try to use a dedicated camera for a change - photo shops will often rent you some equipment so you can test before you buy. Here are some things that a dedicated camera (with the right lenses and a competent user) will always do better:

• - larger image sensor, with larger pixels, so less electronic noise. That means the camera does not need to do the aggressive noise filtering that phones have to do and you'll get more detail. The difference is less visible if you have a LOT of light in the scene and quite obvious as subject lighting decreases
• - larger aperture. This again means more light getting in, so better detail, especially in low light. Also, see the next point
• - bokeh. You can kinda-sorta try to emulate it with software, but you should try and compare with what a dedicated camera can do, especially on that big TV.

Phone cameras have gotten a lot better, but you somehow seem to think that dedicated camera have stagnated. They have not.

Everyone I know who makes my equivalent AGI, except for my household, has 1+ dogs, work crazy hours, and have been told that their dogs are lonely and depressed.

Not one or two people.

EVERYONE. Dozens upon dozens of my clients, colleagues, peers, friends from grade school, etc, have a dog or two, and then they have to have someone come spend time with said dog when they're putting 10+ hours away from them.

Wag/Rover/etc is part of their crazy consumer spending. I always am shocked to hear they're spending $1000 a month on their pets.

Americans are insane about their pets. Instead of buying a dog, I invest in corporate veterinary hospitals, because it's crazy profitable.

Well,
I know about a (good no idea?) developer who had a lot of money.
He paid "online gamers" to harvest items for him in an online game.

Because he thought (and told so in public): "I love that game, and when I play it the 5h a week while I have time, I want to play it by the most potential".

Using an LLM for coding is more or less the same.

If you have to write 100 lines of code that you have clearly in your mind, and takes 3h to do right, but an LLM can spit it out in 30 seconds ... does that make you a bad coder? Using an LLM I mean? I would say your boss calls you a good coder, haha!

Focus the energy on any point of the planet - when the time is right.
And get away with it ...

How do you know? Who's checking?
Stupid question.

I am the one checking. Which was pretty clear from my previous post. /FACEPALM