erikerikson

What the article describes was already a problem. Business people frequently pushed for broken incomplete work via shortcuts, fell for flattery, and otherwise twisted the work for those of us who cared about doing it well and accomplishing valuable and important things.

Early in my career I wrote a product that helped get a startup funding. That product went on to be used, among many other things, to reduce the impacts of genocide. Further actually impactful results were abstract in nature, a framework that was used to start many financially successful companies.

The entire 25 years there was an endless tension to balance actually doing good work and slapping together some garbage really fast. There's some good to that tension but discussing that here would be a distraction. I think AI really accelerated the sloppy acceleration and really emboldened the slop crowd. It's the perfect tool for the blowhards playing politics and irresponsibly pushing under the belief that there is endless grift absorption capacity.

To me the article makes a strong point but what do I know? I'm too busy farming to really think it through.

No risk to life and limb.

Emotionally or psychologically it is significant but that's the traditional bar and blindspot.

Whose responsibility is that?

To be fair those are consummate and thoughtful politics. The industry is rife with those but that was part of why in leaving it.

s/conquered/experienced/

Or

s/conquered/discovered/

...

The fast food experience is a far end of the experience even for the US. I've experienced long meals here in the US too. They are much less systemic than what I experienced and observed in the UK, France, and, Italy. I've had the fast food experience in the UK too; e.g. sausage rolls at Gregg's.

> doesn't appear to work

I'd be sceptical of that claim. Public health interventions often have long time frames. For example the fairly successful campaign against tobacco.

> implies that they're leaving out

Maybe. Or they are just summarizing.

You seem to be working hard to find nefarious efforts in this public health messaging.

Right at the top of the article, after the first picture:

> 239 lawsuits were filed between 2010 and 2025 across Mexico, Colombia, Brazil, the US, the UK, and India against public health policies targeting food and beverages such as front of pack labelling, regulating advertising junk food to children, soda taxes, and taxes on ultra processed foods.

So the rights would be not to put health labeling on the front of their products, advertise unhealthy food to children, and be untaxed for the health externalities their products create.

Maybe the rest of the article when I read it will give me the same experience but starting to read it after reading your comment, this stuck out like a sore thumb.

[edit: nope, it's a straightforward report on cross border behaviors of food companies]

You'll pay extra for those. The ones marked as adds will be cheap. Like how the expensive placement is into the movie (e.g. Apple) rather than the disruptions of the movie.

Like money? Or agriculture?

Sincerely though, can you explain?

The author is talking about released bugs. The tools will then continue finding the bugs they find in new code, keeping those from being released. At least that was my reading of the article.

That's true. The gaming community used the acronym that way. Good exception to the rule.

As your respondents point out there's also been the pattern of clever algorithms being classified as "AI" until they were understood. That differentiated those selling snake oil from the serious.

Obviously not but the community has shifted its language away from AI.

I did not claim we coined AGI in response to marketers.

Those algorithms were only called machine learning and it's the opposite. Before the marketers got ahold of it we reserved AI for the actually intelligent, sentient, full strength vision of intelligent systems. We now talk about general AIs and A[Super]Is.

Are you assuming that everyone prefers sleep regularity such that access is the only predictor?