Wow, that is funny and instructive!

Not surprised. Sadly, attention span for both adults & students is decreasing as both become addicted to screens.

And an American helicopter would be 150k.
So, what is your point?

Oh, yes, "Swiss Rega" sends a bill. But not to the people, but to the insurance ... small but significant difference to your proposal.

AI overview:
"""
Swiss Rega (Schweizerische Rettungsflugwacht) is a private, non-profit air rescue foundation providing emergency medical assistance, mountain rescues, and patient repatriations. Founded in 1952, it operates independently of state subsidies through the financial support of millions of paying patrons.
"""
Emphasizes, mine.

Most "rescue" Operators in Europe, are either:
1) military
2) health care
3) private founded NGOs - like Swizz Rega - you picked a stupid example.

No private person ever gets a bill for anything ...

c1) "normal countries" do not have parks like in America.
Found the dumbest idiot on the internet. You must be American, lolz.

The format today is:
*.md

Everything else is completely irrelevant for the modern AI driven world.

And the Office Suit is: https://obsidian.md/

Unless you need something like Excel for what ever reason, but if you seriously need something like Excel: https://jupyter.org/

Hope that helps, cave man!

Unless the sender is a coworker of you in said institution.

The valuable rare books are going to be old, so not terribly useful for training modern language models
Lolz, you got it completely backward.

AI companies want quality.

Does not matter if the text is cheap or expensive. However cheap in general implies low quality.

An AI trained only on rare texts, would probably be worth it's data centers weight in gold.

John Brunner called them: WASP(s).

That is an open debate if training an AI is a copyright infringement.

I read books.

Learn the stuff, memorize concepts, or even rot memorize parts of it. I use that for my work. E.g. I learned C like that.

That is most certainly not a copyright infringement. I had years where I literally read 100 books per year. Before I moved away from Germany I had a library of perhaps 3k books.

Of course, I did not memorize all of them. I have a friend who could do that. He could even tell on which page a certain subject was discussed.

Point is: I can read as many books as I want. Why should an LLM/AI not be allowed to do that?

You are right.

The movie industry is centered around having about 12 block busters a year. So two or three studios "compete" in bringing the movies into the cinemas in alternating order, so: they do not eat each others profits - by really competing.

And with the greed: they just produce the movies cheaper, instead of having more movies, more cinemas, more people going into a cinema, and: cheaper cinema experiences.

On top of that, it seems the idea that a movie should have a story: is gone.

I remember times when a good movie had two characteristics: you looked out of the window and watch a movie going on on the other side of the road, with no sound - and you could follow the story, easy. Because the cinema play was so gooood!
Or your girl friend was watching a movie in the other room, while I was "working" on my computer, and the dialogs and sound: was so gooood, you could follow the movie without watching it.

Today, you do not find a movie which has a score in one of the two baskets. And AI likely won't change that.

Prompt:
""" I need a movie idea for a block buster. Analyse the last 4 highest earning movies. Extract a sketch for a story similar to it. Generate me 6 ground breaking 30 seconds scenes. Label them with my copyright, e-mail them to 'find some investors'
"""

Sure, sometimes I watch a movie with no real story, like John Wick ... because I like a martial arts overdoze. Actually: I do not remember when I was the last time in a cinema. A ticket and 3 beer was something like $25 ... the only reason I watched the movie till the end: I had three beers ... and did not want to take them home.

Me: AI has not turned out to be better or cheaper than humans right now

Then you are wrong.
If I can do something with AI a normal human can not do: what does "cheaper" mean in that context?
Nothing.

Hint: you can not write an SQL statement, that fetches data from ordinary web sites - which have no machine readable structure - analyze them, according to your English or my German prompt, fetching it from 100 Indian, 100 Chinese, 50 Thai, 50 Japanese, 50 USA and 50 German and half a dozen other EU countries, and spit out the answer to what ever question I had: in my or your language.

You do not even know how to google for a certain phrase in Chinese or Thai. But the LLM: does.

Same if you work in a big company, and the data you seek and want to analyze is simple text in PDF files, that never got "cataloged" and put into a data base. Some things you could do with fancy groovy or perl scripts ... one day developing, two days debugging and never being sure if you actually analyze your files correctly. Because some files contain text in TROFF mode ... B^HBO^HOL^HLD^H text written like this.

Companies like Ford and Meta have had to rehire the people they laid off for AI because AI was not suitable to replace them. Those are only the most recent ones I know about.
Sure - and who is believing such nonsense?
They laid off people, and? Most certainly not "because of AI" - but because they thought they get away with it.

AI is not chat bots (only) - it is everywhere. Obviously you can not save human resources with a chat bot, except: it is about chatting. Like in some customer support.

Did you recently do a phone interview for a job? Likely not. Chances are 98% that your next phone interview will be an AI chat bot. And except for knowing: it is an AI chat bot, you hardly will feel/notice a difference to a real human.

Yes, you are an AI hater. Only stupid haters ignore what is happening around them, and pretend: nothing is happening.

Why not simply call a company "doing AI"? Hu? A friend of mine has a software shop. They do "individual" software development. They did not replace people with AI, why would they? Their software team is now 5 times as productive as without AI. And that "costs" are given as a reasonable price to the customers: who now can order software changes/upgrades: they never could afford to order - in time or budget - without AI. For example: https://www.brickmakers.de/

Yeah, why should one pay 3 months development time, for a "hunch" of a piece of software one thinks he can use "profitable" when it costs $100,000 - and it takes 3 years to recoup the costs? And has no idea if that "idea" is still relevant in 15 months ... oh, in 15 months he only used the software for 12months. So you have a high risk: in money, and in failed development, and not enough time to recoup the investment, if your business direction changes in 12months or more early.

Now they get the software in 3 weeks, for 25k ... and if it is a sunk cost: bad decision. But it is not a sunk company. There is still 75k left over to invest into 3 different other ideas.

Are you seriously living under a rock?

The problem is companies selling AI as replacing humans entirely has been a farce with todays level of technology.
Not sure what is that supposed to mean. No one is "selling AI as" ...
Fact is there are companies that have instead of 90 employees only 5. All others are AI agents.
That did not happen by replacing 85 employees with AI, but that is how the company got founded.

And how did your training help any company with cost savings, productivity, etc so that companies can just use your AI to replace humans?
How should I know that?
Oh, I can't.

They did not tell me in what miserabler state they were before I trained their AIs, nor in what glorious state they were afterwards.

Are you actually to stupid to go on Linkedin or what ever job seeking/seeker/hiring site you like to hang out: and simply browse interesting job offers?

Without AI knowledge: you go no where in our times. Perhaps you can become a brick layer?

The problem is companies selling AI as replacing humans entirely has been a farce with todays level of technology.
It is not about replacing humans. It is about doing things: you can not do without AI ... with todays technology.

Its an established way of marketing, customer testimony, proof
The company exists, because their customers do not want to be disclosed.

A company - aka a customer of Scale.ai - could simply build up their own AI, but they do not want to be known doing that.

No idea why you are so stupid?

Even *I* do not know for which end customers I worked.

No idea what you want to discuss anyway. If you were actually interested in AI you would do your own research.

To assume, makes an ass out of you an me.
Why? Does it disturb you that I worked for a company - but never looked at their webs site? What is disturbing about that? I am absolutely not interested "how they sell themselves" - for what purpose would I need to spent time there? To discuss with you how bad/good their site is? Well: I do not care how bad or good their site is.

Of course there is a way to report it. I report errors on the map all the time. I have probably 100,000 points at google - no idea what I can do with them, though.