No, AI companies don’t “have a PR problem”
They are the problem. It’s in their bones. Harm is their business model. It is not fixable. This is not a case of handing out enough pizza and smiling harder.
No, AI companies don’t “have a PR problem”
They are the problem. It’s in their bones. Harm is their business model. It is not fixable. This is not a case of handing out enough pizza and smiling harder.
A business with incentives to lie and zero consequences for lying, says something about business.
This is not news.


Thanks, I hate it, the people who invented it, the people who assembled the panels, the people who wrote the software, the people who sold it, the people who bought it, the people who installed it, the people who designed the ads for it, the people who maintain it, and the people buying ads for it.
None of them deserve to find happiness.


leads takes


Fuck Fortune for using their position as a mass medium to give this charlatan a place to post his dream journal entries as news.


Hhhhhhhhello
Pleasssse let usss into your houssse we need to feel your ccccchildren
It will be ssssafe and not bad
We are very many all of us going to hhhhhfilm the touching and record it and watchhhh it to make sure it is safe
We promisssse to not eat your children
Let us in we musssst touch them


Bullshit cover-your-ass safety theater. The solution is to stop making the confused computer talk like a human and pretend to be a friend, but they won’t do that because the Eliza effect / AI psychosis is their marketing cheat code.


Clod Coding


“Aggressively de-skilling while simultaneously shitting out tech debt”
Doesn’t roll off the tongue as well, though.
“Slopping”


I am not going to suggest, encourage, applaud and condone arson as a protest, because that is illegal.


The people in that thread who complain and threaten that they are Seriously Considering not trusting Microsoft any more unless they shape up immediately very soon…
If they had any threshold for when they would pass judgement or take any action to switch to alternatives, it would have been passed long ago.
They are just whining until they get distracted and forget about it. They will make the exact same noises the next time something like this happens. And the next, and the next…


Here are a range of estimates of AI data center water use for California, based mostly on simple fundamental physics of converting energy use to water use for cooling. I did these calculations and then, perhaps appropriately, checked and explored these estimates using four AI models
He guessed, then asked the sycophant machine to tell him he is a smart and clever boy.
To illustrate his point he used a nightmare-inducing AI generated image with talking headless birds and water flowing uphill into both ends of a tube.


They are pushing the “so powerful it is scary” arms race angle. Give us money so our country build God first, see.
The actual fear of “so useless and expensive it is scary how much people are trying to adopt it” doesn’t encourage investment.


Why math?


Does this also mean that my calculator with googly eyes glued onto it isn’t eligible for the Nobel Prize in physics? This is discrimination!


I am just astounded as to how they manage the architecture + understanding + optimization + maintenance context.
They don’t. They fuck it the shit up. While AI huffers will not hesitate to tell me that actually a hypothetical blabla bla blabla, I have yet to see an agentic coder make something that holds up to reality, safety, reliability, or maintenance.


This pickup truck can accelerate to thirty thousand pickup trucks per hour, and fuel efficiency is one quarter quarter quarter toy pickup truck per pickup truck.


Maybe if we tricked them into saying, like, “as heavy as a three hundred kilogram box of bricks”
Yeah, it’s what they do. Generate convincing text. Calling it “errors” makes as much sense as claiming my dice “produced errors” when I lost at yahtzee.
An illustrative example: https://kucharski.substack.com/p/real-signals-or-artificial-stereotypes
"First, I’d created 2000 free-text responses and labelled them ‘UK’. Then I copied and pasted the exact same 2000 responses but labelled these ‘US’. Finally, I combined them to create a dataset of 4000 total responses, and jumbled them up.
Despite the responses being identical for the UK and US, Copilot produced a rich, detailed summary of how US and UK respondents differed."