smashspectacle

Ed Zitron is going to become the Simpsons of ai critiques...

SaaS will die back, but not because of this. However, if we entertain this painfully silly idea, simply consider this: if script wrappers around some genAI can replace a SaaS you not longer need to pay for the aaS. Regardless, the slop injection into most major SaaS providers has already begun to cost them customers, so hopefully more businesses will remember you can just higher some humans for a more predictable cost and personalized results with support that knows your system. SaaS was a mistake, much like genAI hype.

Birds are not the only thing that can fly. Planes fly, or more specifically they are a tool to allow humans to fly. Therefore, your weird attempt to sound clever has made you look the fool. LLM, on the otherhand, are being described with human characteristics they do not have to keep their gullible cultists charged up and running defense for these billionares exploring us.

YouTube encourages A/B testing of both titles and thumbnails, but it could be either.

Another set of hype babel to fool people not trained in the field. Yes, some people developed a tool that is really good at reproducing a tool we developed (language). There is no logical pathway that this follows into biology. To put this in terms relevant to mathematicians, logicians, and statisticians behind llms: language is a subset of biology, therefore biology contains orders more complexity. And all of that neglects the fact that without proposed mechanisms you are just reproducing the unexplained in silico, not that impressive, new, or useful in most contexts.

Lot of people trying to psychoanalyze why a statistical machine will include something in its training set with a nonzero probability... It includes this option because it will eventually include all options it is trained on if given enough time. Given all the historical, fictional, academic, and sensational content on the topic, it is not surprising it emerges so readily.