if all your customers hate it 10x more than humans?

India should protect its pool of human workers: when the backlash against AI hits full force, they'll be well-positioned to retake the market.

I never thought I'd say I find calling customer support and being greeted by this unmistakable heavy Bangalore accent refreshing and reassuring: at least I know I'm talking to someone who understands my question and not something that serves me the nearest matching boilerplate answer from the support knowledgebase in a sycophantic transatlantic accented tone.

How else will I be able to feel that deep sense of dread when I call any company's customer support and I'm greeted by an overly polite chatbot that's so syrupy it gives me type-2, that doesn't understand my problem and refuses to let me talk to a real person?

Censorship is a big no-no for tech companies. Particularly when it doesn't make then any money.

I've been hosting my open-source projects on Github for years.

Why you ask? After all, isn't every open-source and free software advocate's duty to stay clear away from Microsoft?

Here's my reason: I only use the git part of Github. I don't use any of Microsoft's proprietary crap on top of it.

Therefore, Microsoft has no vendor lock-in on me: my projects are one git-push away from being hosted elsewhere. I waste their resources by making them host my massive files for free and they have absolutely nothing to show for it - no revenue, no private data to monetize, nothing.

But the minute Microsoft starts getting annoying, my repos are gone. I'll move them to Codeberg and I will gladly pay for the hosting in the form of donations.

When you have 32 kilobytes of RAM and a 1 MHz processor, you need all the programming talent you can get to squeeze the most performances out of them.

When you have 32 gigabytes and dozens of cores, any incompetent code monkey can churn out the same application in Visual Basic or Python.

Resources don't make your computer faster. They empower incompetent and sloppy developers, who crucially are paid less than good ones, so their boss can make more money.

I remember in the last 90's / early 2000's discussing with a colleague how it was possible that X allocated 2 megabytes for an empty window, just for sitting there on the screen.

to serve up advertisement and privacy-invadind SaaS at lightning speed. I can't wait!

and low bars for academic performances have been the norm for a long time.

They're also never actually free on the scamazon store, it's just a subscription that you don't ever own.

It's coming to light due to the private equity buyout lead by esteemed real estate criminal Jared Kushner. This is likely anti-woke washing to entice a class of customers who have already moved along due to EA sucking for lots of other reasons which won't be addressed.

Why solve real problems intentionally created due to mismanagement when you can just play the culture war card and get a bunch of knee-jerk reactions?

When Reddit announced they would sell user-generated data to AI companies for training purposes, I went back to literally thousands of my old technical posts and inserted subtle nonsense in them.

They look legit, and a competent human being reading through them would very easily realize they're nonsense (you know, things like "Type taskmgr and kill systemd"). But AI doesn't, and I've already read AI-generated "help" pages containing some of the shit I seeded on Reddit.

So if you too want to debase AI, poison the well: it really does works.

I'm sure you won't if there's enough money to be made...

Today's TiVo is to TiVo of yesteryear what today's Sharper Image is to Sharper Image of yesteryear: a pointless company bearing the name of something great that used to exist for real.

How about if this one guys is 1 million times better off and he uses his insane wealth to install a raging fascist in the White House who ruins everybody's lives and threatens world peace?

I can easily do without the technological disruption this one guy, and all the other guys like him, bring about.

is fine if it doesn't create obscene inequalities and equally obscene psychopathic billionaires. If that's the cost of disruptive technology, I'm perfectly happy to hamper it.