39896880

Such a situation strains credulity. Voice acting is a profession, and professionals by their nature are aware of the wider industry, including the competition. SJ was the world’s highest paid actress in 2018-2019. The film Her was nominated for 5 Academy Awards, including Best Picture, and won Best Original Screenplay.

Even if this did go down the way you suppose, once they realized the obvious similarities, the ethical thing to do was to not use the voice. It doesn’t matter if the intention was pure. It doesn’t matter if it was an accident.

An evil actor could do those things, but they don’t because smart people work really hard to build systems that make doing those things more difficult and/or with dire consequences to the potential actors. Shrugging at the AI threat reminds me of “I felt better so I stopped taking the medication.”

One side has a basis in neuroscience[0], the other in a need to exploit naive optimism to make the stock go up.

[0] https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/592344/determined-b...

It seems you think three years should be long enough for you see the apocalypse. Why is that enough time, do you think? How long was the web around before it caught fire and changed everything?

Who said it wasn’t? The article is about one Starbucks in Toronto. We don’t know how many Starbucks stores closed, moved, changed their hours, or rearranged their furniture, or had managers willing to tell homeless to move on.

> what do you lose by iTerm2 having an opt-in feature that you don't need to use?

Trust. “AI” features are a trust rubicon. Once you add it, the assumption is that surveillance is now baked in.

Thanks. The funny thing is… FSD actually works really well now! But, I’m no longer interested in it as a feature.

The comments here are getting hung up on the 200 years claim. The point is not that the information will last literally 200 years; it’s that it will last long enough for you to transfer it to a more modern medium when the time comes.

Peak consumption happens around 45-54, and then declines. Kids are out of the house (which is paid for). At retirement, consumption is more conservative because the retiree is on a fixed income.

Speaking of fixed incomes, these retirees are dependent on risky investments like real estate (collapsing) and public pension schemes (about to collapse). On top of this, retirees aren’t generally the consumers of the supply chain components that China makes. Remember, they never moved up the value chain of sophisticated goods manufacturing. They got too expensive before that.

Is it too late to join the class action lawsuit? I’m not too upset at the price I paid for it but I wouldn’t mind a refund.

> then they plan on moving to an internal consumption centric model.

China does not have the demographics for this.

It appears that sama and co said whatever they needed to say to investors to convince them they cared about the actual future, so now it’s time to switch to quarterly profit goals. That was fast. Next up:

* Stealth ads in the model output

* Sale of user data to databrokers

* Injection into otherwise useful apps to juice the usage numbers.

Spike Jonze should be flattered. The conversation mode is a straight copy of the OS in Her.

Pronatalism doesn’t belong to religion especially. People didn’t used to have a lot of kids because God told them to, they had a lot of kids because they were free labor.

In that way, the pendulum is already starting to swing the other way in the US with the loosening of child labor laws.

Secularly, though, we’d have to do something to make it not hellishly expensive and inconvenient to have children. The US can’t even extend the child tax credit, much less fix healthcare, housing, education, food deserts, or childcare all at once.

“Number of humans” is a nonsensical metric because it doesn’t acknowledge the systems that humans comprise. For example, we depend on the young to earn/work and the middle aged to earn/work/invest to support the old/disabled. What happens when there are fewer young people, and then fewer middle aged people, to support the old /disabled not in just a few pockets of the world but in many countries all at once is still very much unknown.

It’s not the number of humans, it’s the age distribution of those humans + where they live.

Put another way: you can “feel” like the world needs fewer people, but you’re probably not going to like what your world looks like when that desire comes true.

An average iPhone user isn’t going to shoot a commercial so it doesn’t seem like a particularly interesting question.

Yes, it makes me wonder if the “Open” part of “OpenAI” was just a play for time while they ingested as much of the world’s knowledge. It sure seems that way.

It’s amazing how fast OpenAI succumbed to the siren’s song of surveillance capitalism.

I made no such claim.

The mission of libraries is generally to increase access to works, not reduce. Your plan would hit the group who needs it most - the working poor who don’t have the means / time to go to a physical library.

I think you mean “dependency” and not “addiction.” Addiction is by definition a bad thing:

“Addiction is a neuropsychological disorder characterized by a persistent and intense urge to use a drug or engage in a behaviour that produces natural reward, despite substantial harm and other negative consequences.”

You’re right about nicotine though. It’s the delivery that’s the problem, in addition to the addictive properties which make the harm of the delivery less salient. Emphasis mine. From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addiction?wprov=sfti1#

No. Mental health in Japan is not broadly talked about. Anyone experiencing a mental health crisis is probably being cared for privately.

They also have massive societal pressure to conform and a ton of 24 hour businesses like internet cafes. It is likely that the definition of homeless being reported here doesn’t capture people who don’t have a stable address but would never come forward to be counted.

Yes, that’s correct. That’s not particularly unusual, the US did the same thing to Grindr.

We’re talking about an app, not food or medicine, so this comparison doesn’t seem apt.

Misleading ads for movies is an age old problem. For the longest time, the poster on IMdb for the movie Infernal Affairs (remade in the US as The Departed) prominently featured a woman holding a gun. She isn’t in the movie and to this day I still don’t know who the hell she is. [0]

[0] https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMTk5ODc1Nzg2N15BMl5B...

The “choice” for users amounts to “let us track you, or completely disconnect from commerce and communication.” That is not a choice, that is extortion. Especially when you add a literal protection fee to it.

Recall that the fee was only implemented to comply with the EU regulation and ostensibly to make up for the revenue not gained from selling behavioral information. If you want to test who Facebook’s real customers are, look at whose interests they put first.

> Isn't it up to consumers and the company to find the equilibrium price?

Remember, Facebook’s users are not the consumers. They are the sources of surveillance capitalism’s crucial surplus: the objects of a technologically advanced and increasingly inescapable raw-material-extraction operation. Surveillance capitalism’s actual customers are the enterprises that trade in its markets for future behavior.