I think the best term for AI luddites such as yourself is "AI Vegans".

Like vegans, you know a tiny sliver of reality, and make it your whole world. Like vegans, we don't need to know you're like this, because you'll tell us. Like vegans, you're wrong on almost everything. Like vegans, you believe your faith makes you a higher form of being, and those who disagree just "are lesser" i.e. "do not understand math".

Like vegans, you'll mostly go away in a decade or two.

It's actually the opposite. It was stagnant between 1960s and early 2000s. Where we thought we'd need to program it, because we were modelling it on ourselves even back then, and back then we thought brain was biologically fully pre-programmed.

Then fMRI brain imaging came, we understood how brain functions, that's it's not pre-programmed but learning from basic LLM-like template and then inferring based on what it learned (remember the "90% of the brain is not used" pre-fMRI myth?), and within a decade, basics of modern AI being "learn and infer" principle became mainstream.

And then they look at alternatives, and conclude "yes, this is in fact by far the best system we've ever had for this purpose".

"It's not perfect" is utopian thinking. What matters is "is this the best system we had so far".

Curious opinion considering that legal profession is mostly applied about logic. You learn the rules, and they you use logic to apply them to each situation.

Of course we do. We literally modeled current gen AI on it.

In fact, we even know that LLMs overwhelmingly struggle learning where humans struggle as well. Because it's the same process.

The only difference is that we are embodied and spend decades learning, while they have far more compute and memory and are able to learn in days. Each grants us slightly different advantages and disadvantages within the learning process.

Which is fundamentally the same process.

It is literally learning though. It's a neural network modeled on human brain, learning in the same way human brain does.

You going "lalalala, can't hear you" isn't changing reality. It's still learning.

In EU, most grid operators learned from the mistakes of "let's just let everyone feed grid from unexpected input points all at once, and then stop all at once".

So the offset for feed in tariff is so high that it's basically never profitable to do so.

Correct, that's why I didn't mention it at all.

All I spoke about is that "you're not taking electricity from the grid when electricity from the grid is basically free, and you're taking electricity from the grid when when electricity is hilariously expensive".

It's telling that I haven't talked about that at all, and yet both naysayers claim I did, because that's your narrative.

If you're in Europe like me, when it's sunny and windy the price is going to be near zero, and when it's not it's going to spike to mid to high two digits cents per kilowatt. Had some cases of going to three digits in recent years. That really sucked.

I.e. you're "harvesting" when it's near zero cost electricity, and having to pay when it's expensive. The only thing that could give you any "return on investment" is the legally mandated 24 hour pricing shift which if memory serves me right is EU mandated, which is specifically designed to artificially inflate price of electricity renewables produce to give them a chance of paying for themselves at all.

Both are true at once. Preference mathching is best, but preference shifting can work if you have a correct template for that specific human. Then you can determine what preference shifting has worked on this type of human in the past, and deliver that kind of material in that kind of context to get the process along.

Notably, same thing is required. Deep understanding of one's thoughts. Preferably before one thinks them.

Want a scary thought?

What is your wife doing on your wifi, and who is she dressing up for?

Want a REALLY scary thought?

Look up the trend of old men autogynephilia that leads to cross dressing and even social transition.

Except that of course, none of this happened. Read the facts.

You vastly overestimate how far a few hundred millions gets you in the industry that moves several trillions USD in insurable value a month. These massive superyachts are tiny boats are a rounding error for insurance clubs that insure ships that cost billions to tens of billions as a matter of routine by the hundreds. And they do NOT fuck around with ship safety. They blacklist the Master, the Master better learn how to flip burgers real fast.

I should add that in old scenarios where they couldn't do behavioral patterns very well, they still had specific circumstances they could track.

For example, say a specific hard drive model has a known controller logic problem that will manifest in drive just randomly not being recognized on boot any more after a specific amount of time. Imagine something like Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 controller failure, which was well understood to happen in a specific time frame after first start of the drive due to controller logic bug.

Now imagine I'm facebook. I got a tracking cookie that enabled me to see that you did in fact buy this drive on this day. I also got a tracking cookie from a page with build guides that indicates you accessed it the next day.

That means I can push very expensive, very high value data recovery service ads to you within specific time frame when this drive is expected to fail. And you will have a moment of "holy fuck, my drive is gone, my wife's photo album, my kids, my dog, my pet fish!!! Panic! What do I do?"

Go on facebook to ask and... it's right there in your face before you even get to the relevant local group. An ad for a local data recovery service. "Oh my god, thank you facebook! You saved my marriage!!!"