1. For the love of God please stop saying "Huh?" This is not Reddit, nor is the is comment you're replying to so unbelievably stupid that you are literally dumbfounded. I can tell, because you managed to put together a reply after the "Huh?"
2. 80% of the posts in that article-thingy are "no longer available".
Some people already said it’s useless to learn to program because AI will do, that‘s the hype of AI not that AI isn’t useful as such like parent comment suggested.
They push AI into everything like it’s the ultimate solution but it is not instead is has serious limitations.
The AI companies sell it like the AI could do it by itself and developers are obsolete but in reality it‘s a tool that still needs developers to make something useful
Doesn’t claim it isn’t useful just it’s not as useful as they thought.
For instance to me AI is useful because I don’t have to write boilerplate code but that’s rarely the case. For other things it still useful to write code but I am not faster because the time I save writing the code I need to fix the prompt, audit and fix the code.
I've worked under communist regime. A real one, a few decades ago, and let me tell you, they also demanded proof of disability. Did you have different experience?
I wasn't trying to claim that only capitalists dehumanize people. But that's what we mostly see today because that's the majority of our society.
When it comes to the types of disabilities that are being discussed in this thread and that I was referring to - to say varied types of autism - I doubt any type of organisation that treats employees as "resources" will work in a decent way.
> That's not true at all. Someone can simply buy all the media, and the free market will not correct that as long as that person has the wealth to persist.
Do you have an example of that happened in real life? Not just a hypothesis. When was a person being wealthy enough to buy all the media?
Not the person you’re replying to, but there used to be regulations limiting ownership of radio & TV stations in the US. When these regulations were lifted in the 1990s, it resulted in one company (Clear Channel) going on just such a buying spree.
I'm in an AI focused education research group, and most "smart/personalized tutors" on the market have similar processes and outcomes as paper flashcards.
> LLMs and the platforms powering them are quickly becoming one-stop shops for any ML-related tasks. From my perspective, the real revolution is not the chat ability or the knowledge embedded in these models, but rather the versatility they bring in a single system.
Why use another piece of software if LLM is good enough?
Performance. A museum visitor may not have a good internet connection, so any solution that involves uploading a photo to a server will probably be (much) slower than client-side detection. There’s a thin line between a magical experience and an annoying gimmick. Making people wait for something to load is a sure way to cross that line.
Also privacy. Do museum visitors know their camera data is being sent to the United States? Is that even legal (without consent) where the museum is located? Yes, visitors are supposed to be pointing their phone at a wall, but I suspect there will often be other people in view.
The cost of LLM inference is cheap and will continue to decrease. More traditional methods take up far more of an engineer's time (which also costs money).
If I have a project with a low enough lifetime inputs I'm not wasting my time labelling data and training a model. That time could be better spent working on something else. As long as the evaluation is thorough, it doesn't matter. But I still like doing some labelling manually to get a feel for the problem space.
Google's revenue for 2023 was $307.394B, a 8.68% increase from 2022.
2022 was $282.836B, a 9.78% increase from 2021.
2021 was $257.637B, a 41.15% increase from 2020.
https://www.twz.com/news-features/u-s-has-attacked-irans-nuc...
and see for yourself if Twitter is dead.