Right, but this is about the noteworthiness of talking about someone shorting AI. Who cares if joe schmoe from accounting shorted their six shares? It’d only be newsworthy if it’s someone with significant investment or supposed insider knowledge shorting it.
“multiple people” doesn’t mean much unless it’s one of the top twenty people that own most of the stock market.
They got their user base by being the first ones to have open access to it. Being the first to market OFC gives a massive advantage.
You are also using flawed logic. This isn’t AI vs everything. This is ONLY the “AI” products compared to themselves. These same exact numbers could happen with 1000 users across the entire world, yet you claim it’s evidence of general public acceptance.
Flawed logic is bad logic. ChatGPT also sells their services to other corporations, where several of the others are end-user only, so again, you are using flawed logic to pretend like everyone actually wants this horseshit.
ChatGPT sold themselves as the easy way to add “AI” to products. I would not be surprised what so ever if the VAST majority of ChatGPT’s usage came from other people forcing it into their products (like all the companion apps) and not actual, direct interest in AI from the general populace.
Think of it like mobile gaming. Most people do not spend much money at all on the microtransaction bullshit. Though it’s still successful in making the company money, thanks to whales and other uncommon big spenders. It would be totally unsurprising if GPT is getting their numbers in a similar fashion. Not from end users, but from selling it as a service to other companies and a very small percentage of heavy users.
The problem with shorting is you have to guess when the bubble pops. Call it too early, and you don’t get the short at all. Call it too late, and any possible earnings may get wiped out by rebounds and/or new bubbles.
Read my last paragraph, then. It’s not how much MS gets in everyones’ face. It’s the specific avenues in which these companies are exposed. Google is everywhere on a platform that people don’t have to install to try things out, or have it automatically execute without permission.
MS is not. Do you not remember the MASSIVE outcry when MS said they were turning on Copilot for everyone? They tried to shove it everyones’ faces ala google, but their avenues for forcing shit are plainly different.
Because they’re easier to ignore and disable than the biggest advertiser and search platform on the planet that gets their grubby hands in everything? MS doesn’t have nearly as much of an online presence, and that’s exactly where these “AI” are getting used.
On top of that, Google gets to feed search queries into their AI and generate results for most searches. Copilot does not get to arbitrarily answer every search someone types in to Windows.
So… yea, in a way, everyone else is more capable of forcing engagement than MS. Would you be more likely to try something that’s merely available on a website, or more likely to enable a technology that could extract all of your personal information from your computer on accident?
When the competition is replacing workers en masse, yes.
You realize these companies can force growth via cramming it in to every channel they own, right? You realize growth on paper is not public endorsement, right?
No they want to capitalize on pedos finding victims.
Only some know. You ironically give them too much credit for having brains…
Capitalism isn’t fixing anything here. In fact, it’s showing that the companies mindlessly following market inflation to keep profits up are doing worse.
If it has the AI content flag, it’s most likely slop.
CEOs are more dangerous than pedos. Mostly because they’re far more open and have the money to do damage to more than those they psrsonally meet.
Case in point: This fucking creeper.
Just all personally targeted ads. Sure, I don’t mind if they advertise tools while I’m actively shopping for tools. But that shouldn’t haunt me for the next two months on every partner site… Not only is it intrusive and annoying, that’d still be collecting a profile of data they get to sell off or get hacked over.
The idea is excellent, especially factoring in the few current suggestions to retain maximum privacy.
However, I think you’re going to hit some really big hiccups when hitting the real world. Many FOSS projects may not have completely obvious donation schemes, let alone ubiquitous and automatable schemes, for starters. Even providing clean links to patreons/coffee may end up quite an obnoxious task even using machine learning to yoink links from readmes et. al… Not to say it’s impossible, I’m saying that getting an accurate pie graph is just the beginning.
In addition, the dependencies suggestion is a pretty important and massive chestnut. It will certainly turn out that many core dependencies are used a huge portion of the time. Some disproportionately so. It will also certainly be very difficult to find and include any dependencies that are compiled in to things, and may not have obvious signatures without analyzing the source.
Of course, if things are truly FOSS, these concerns should be solvable in some way or another. Just don’t be surprised if you end up having to analyze source to get a remotely complete list!
rofl you offer no evidence, only insults. Yore a pathetic joke and you’re trying to make it my problem. Move along, loser.
My comment wasn’t about how open or closed VPNs are, you fucking moron. It was about how they’re not a silver bullet for protecting privacy.
That’s literally not how VPNs work nor are you aware of what you’re talking about.
Using a VPN does absolutely nothing to protect from their apps scraping up and phoning home telemetry.
It’s still YOUR phone. It’s still YOUR GPS location. It’s still YOUR data connection. A VPN is not a catch-all solution to privacy.
There is nothing inherently wrong with “money”. It’s literally just a wildcard resource. A placeholder to exchange for real things. The problem arises when greedy pieces of shit decide to not pay workers what they earned and seek profit and/or rent.