It can still be used that way. While most people talk about how corrupt politicians enrich themselves with fake currencies, more legal and legitimate uses can still use decentralized ledgers for useful things. Of course these won't make headlines.
benjirenji
joined 4 months ago
I'd had so many police visits in my teenage years in the 90s and early 00s if there were this level of automated surveillance.
And hopefully these protocols are backward compatible so I can still use a limited feature set running an older version. I think this would be a big step towards avoiding any fragmentation.
I hate when software supports up to an arbitrary version number and if you just fake the version string in your client or framework it just works fine. Why set up arbitrary hurdles?
Open source is fine, but if we depend on badly funded one man projects with a maintainer about to burn out, we've created an extremely fragile system.
The argument is of course that anyone can just pick up a project, fork it and make it better, but we have to remain realistic how often a tech stack can survive a fragmentation of an important project. Compatibility and interoperability is vital.
This can and maybe even should happen once in a while, but if it happens too often it'll do damage to the userbase.
Absolutely true. Tech companies and others love to conflate them. It's also a money thing: Idiots with too much money (that we should probably tax to use for something useful) want to invest in AI, so if I've been working on a project that needs funds, I just rebrand it as "AI", even if it just runs on more traditional ML principles.
It's a second dark age approaching. It's slow, maybe not in our lifetime but with the enormous pressure of climate and demographic crisis add the regression of human cognition and destruction of researchable truth and you will get a collapse of the global economy and a shift in priorities (survival first) that will bring a dark age.
This is fundamentally different than chat bots and the anti-AI movement needs to learn this to be effective.
If you want to align virtual content with the real world in any way you need a camera attached. Sure, you can use the display for notifications and content that doesn't care where you're facing, but having a display attached to your face is a too juicy scenario not to do more with it.
Cars ruin cities in general.
We gotta start building alternatives already. Us being here on Lemmy is already a start.
Unless you did a shallow clone or something every repo clone is complete in git.
Aren't you assuming productivity gains will lead to free time? Why? It never has. Most of us work a fixed amount of time and get paid for that time. Not the amount of tasks we finish if that can even be measured.
Salaries have also not increased with increased productivity long before chatbots came online. So they won't suddenly increase now.
AI is much more just like a new laptop you get from work. The new device is faster, has more RAM and allows you to do more, potentially.
The big question is, if the purchase was worth it. Unlike a new laptop, LLMs are an ongoing cost to users and providers. Nobody except for GPU producers are actually making money right now. Hyperscalers make some of the money back they themselves invested into the companies using their services, but in the end the ROI looks pretty dim for anyone.
So even if there are real productivity gains, you won't see people relax with their kids more. And even if these gains are significant they may not prevent a huge economic collapse so we all will have plenty of time with our kids in the end anyway.