General Discussion

paleotn

(22,206 posts)

70. Even Elmo doesn't know what he has in mind.

Sun Mar 29, 2026, 03:33 PM

22 hrs ago

He's a ketamine doped dweeb who lucked into his billions by starting on third base, coupled with the lottery of being in the right place at exactly the right time. Lottery that is. Not anything he actually did. That said, the vast majority of what he spews is unworkable bullshit that will never happen.

Still waiting for "self driving" taxis that don't need a team of remote, human operators in The Philippines and elsewhere. I'm not holding my breath.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

3 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

GrapesOfWrath ProfessorGAC Wednesdays

89 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

So, I'm gonna stir the pot a bit... don't be too harsh... [View all] Joinfortmill Yesterday OP

Its a loaded gun, given to a child. Swede Yesterday #1

AI is simply a change accelerant to make the wealthy wealthier more quickly Tim S Yesterday #2

Best explanation of it I've heard so far Walleye Yesterday #3

Except this time genxlib Yesterday #10

Elon Musk promises an age of abundance thought crime Yesterday #23

Elitist billionaires... Safe as Milk 23 hrs ago #53

I believe he said that is one possible path genxlib 23 hrs ago #57

Even Elmo doesn't know what he has in mind. paleotn 22 hrs ago #70

Oh dear lord. Not this shit again. paleotn 22 hrs ago #64

I hope you are right genxlib 21 hrs ago #73

We already have near humanoid robots... paleotn 21 hrs ago #75

Thanks for the interesting links - bookmarking. jmbar2 20 hrs ago #88

Well, that describes the market. thought crime Yesterday #37

Yup. orangecrush Yesterday #46

Ha! I think I could do better stirring, but I'll pass. BootinUp Yesterday #4

I'd take one of these leftstreet Yesterday #5

Of course, that video was made with AI thought crime Yesterday #26

How about AI is like fire, and has to be controlled FullySupportDems Yesterday #6

Exactly. anciano Yesterday #7

I agree. But it has to have some (considerable regulatory) constraints hlthe2b Yesterday #8

A LOT of constraints! n/t Safe as Milk 23 hrs ago #56

Seems like a... 2naSalit Yesterday #9

It's much better and safer than Google gulliver Yesterday #11

I have yet to find a single AI summary which is accurate. Ms. Toad Yesterday #15

It's better for the AI to tell you about your symptoms than Google gulliver Yesterday #16

It is absolutely NOT better for AI to tell you about your symptoms than Google Ms. Toad 21 hrs ago #76

The trouble with Wiki isn't that it spouts false information on a regular basis. Igel Yesterday #18

Agreed - but it took me until the last paragraph to get the AI connection. Ms. Toad 21 hrs ago #79

I've found many accurate responses from AI summary thought crime Yesterday #28

Those AI overviews are stealing traffic from the websites they stole the information from, and the highplainsdem Yesterday #35

And you've fact checked every bit of its response? Ms. Toad 21 hrs ago #78

A Substantial Majority Of The Time... ProfessorGAC 20 hrs ago #89

A coworker used AI to get a second opinion from his doctor's. Shermann Yesterday #41

I have a long history of correcting doctors with independent research. Ms. Toad 21 hrs ago #81

Anthropic Claude is very accurate. milestogo Yesterday #42

It still hallucinates. All genAI models do. It can hallucinate at any time, and for that reason its highplainsdem Yesterday #47

Define accurate. paleotn 22 hrs ago #65

I haven't specifically checked it myself - Ms. Toad 21 hrs ago #77

And current LLMs do exactly the same thing as Google search or YouTube algorithms. You just don't realize it. paleotn 22 hrs ago #66

While I agree, in principle as to the possibilities for it's use, Ms. Toad Yesterday #12

"AI relies on the stolen works of humans (art and writing)..." mike_c 20 hrs ago #86

Without planning and guardrails... Happy Hoosier Yesterday #13

AI doesn't concern me as much... biocube Yesterday #14

You aren't wrong ... BUT KentuckyWoman Yesterday #17

Of course it is, Disaffected Yesterday #19

If you mean generative AI, the kind most hyped now, it's badly flawed tech based on stolen intellectual property, highplainsdem Yesterday #20

Very true statement mgardener Yesterday #21

Absolutely. It's a key tool of production. David__77 Yesterday #22

It works - to the extent it works when it's mindless and will always hallucinate - only because of IP theft. highplainsdem Yesterday #29

I guess that depends on one's view of "intellectual property". David__77 Yesterday #32

The AI companies who felt they had a right to take everyone else's IP have been quick to scream if highplainsdem Yesterday #40

That's absolutely true and on a certain level funny to see. David__77 21 hrs ago #82

I'm in favor of creatives owning their intellectual property, and that right being protected. It's as highplainsdem 21 hrs ago #84

That can certainly be adjudicated as with any other property issue. David__77 20 hrs ago #85

Legal judgments aren't always ethical, as everyone here is aware. Creatives and those who support highplainsdem 20 hrs ago #87

A.I. got us Donald Trump in 2024. Nuff said. Botany Yesterday #24

Wish AI meant actual (human) intelligence. BattleRow 23 hrs ago #49

AI is the devil. We think we can control it, but we can't. Scrivener7 Yesterday #25

Devil with the Blue Dress? She's the Devil in disguise? thought crime Yesterday #31

The problem is not a fork or a knife, the problem is who has it in their hand...An assassin with a knife is very Escurumbele Yesterday #27

"Guns aren't the problem..." ? thought crime Yesterday #33

An accurate analogy, however dlk Yesterday #30

I agree. I've been saying this about computers for decades. However, I think most of us agree that IA should be Martin68 Yesterday #34

I think it sound like a scream.AAAAA.IIIIII... MiHale Yesterday #36

The problem is not how we use it, Mblaze Yesterday #38

The most critical word is "you" -- meaning WHO? Martin Eden Yesterday #39

If it were only looked as a fork Javaman Yesterday #43

We are about to FAFO on AI. LudwigPastorius Yesterday #44

True, AI by itself is benign. The companies controlling it, however, are not. tinrobot Yesterday #45

hmmm...almost 50 replies and no interaction... ret5hd 23 hrs ago #48

I sometimes stir a pot in the kitchen and then walk away until dinner is served Soul_of_Wit 22 hrs ago #60

Don't see how that's "stirring the pot" ABC123Easy 23 hrs ago #50

I do agree with you there. One of my smartest friends, a tech professional, thinks like Joinformill. Scrivener7 23 hrs ago #55

It's a tool for the billionaire overlords, not for us FakeNoose 23 hrs ago #51

Where was our blue ribbon commission prior to its release. Prairie_Seagull 23 hrs ago #52

AI can be rejected - and should be, by ethical, smart people who have any choice in the matter. highplainsdem 22 hrs ago #59

Granted that using genAI is optional and can be rejected..... anciano 22 hrs ago #62

It's genAI being hyped and used most widely. Which is why people need to know about how harmful highplainsdem 22 hrs ago #63

The sole cat I ever had agreed with you. Prairie_Seagull 21 hrs ago #83

Not like a fork: like a cruise missle with a spork instead of a warhead. JustABozoOnThisBus 23 hrs ago #54

Two huge negatives, both related to human nature Soul_of_Wit 23 hrs ago #58

In addition, we need... cornball 24 22 hrs ago #61

And using AI harms human intelligence. See this thread on yet another article about that: highplainsdem 22 hrs ago #67

That's very simple Renew Deal 22 hrs ago #68

Sadly, few people are fully able to tell when AI provides facts or fallacies. MineralMan 22 hrs ago #69

This is absolutely true! Oneironaut 22 hrs ago #71

AI differs from a fork in that a fork does not PufPuf23 22 hrs ago #72

americans can't be trusted with sharp objects bigtree 21 hrs ago #74

AI cannot replace humans Progressive dog 21 hrs ago #80