Did anyone stop to ask themselves if we even would want to watch AI videos?

Of course not.

I, and I suspect many other people, watch YouTube for the people in the videos and their experiences (or at least the illusion of that). Watching fake videos defeats the whole purpose.

YouAITube sounds like nothing more than a kaleidoscope with extra steps.

That’s what happens when you aren’t the (sole) paying customer.

I think anyone familiar with the laws of thermodynamics could have predicted this outcome.

1 can be solved with regulation or nationalization. Services online should be public services. Like school, police, roads. You can still have private alternatives too.

It’s funny that with all our technology, paper is still the most durable storage medium (under normal conditions) that doesn’t cost an arm and a leg.

Sophistication often creates fragility. The human mind marvels at sophistication naturally; appreciation for resilience usually only comes after that fragile thing has broken. Of course it’s too late by then.

All them young whipper snappers will continue to learn these life lessons the hard way, it seems.

This is not how patents work. At all.

For one, patent owners are generally more than happy to license their technology to integrators, and even competitors, if there is money to be made.

More importantly, patents cannot be used to get exclusivity on products. Rather, patents can only protect novel approaches to how a product is made or served.

The patent system is designed to protect R&D costs exclusively, not some get out of jail card for anti trust. Of course, the patent office isn’t perfect, the system does get abused in anti-competitive ways. But in the end, it’s rare that that results in less consumer choice, because of licensing deals.

There is no rule that the angles of a triangle add to 180 degrees.

I think this is debatable. If it was not, then the answer to OP’s question would be obvious, and this thread would be uninteresting. The words we use carry a lot of unwritten baggage.

LLMs == AGI was and continues to be a massive lie perpetuated by tech companies and investors that people still have not woken up to.

“Conservative” means… to conserve. You (and everyone) gets more conservative as they age because you kinda want to conserve the status quo you, personally are used to.

Here’s the thing: with social progress, what you want to conserve is different from what the generation before the progress wants to preserve.

You are a conservative, as in conserving, of the progress that we have achieved. The “conservatives” you refer to, the “political right”, are not conservative. They are regressives, the opposite of progressives (though they might not like the connotation of that label, and will denounce it). These people would like to regress society to a time when these members of society had more consolidation of power (feudalism, fascism, racist/sexist segregation). Nothing “conservative” about that in terms of a human lifetime. In fact none of those people were around to experience what feudalism, fascism, segregation etc. was actually like. Many of these people may have been sold a lie by the 1% for the exclusive benefit of the 1%.

Non-boomer here, I hate squirrels.

If you try to grow your own vegetables, you too will come to hate squirrels. I promise. Ageism need not apply to squirrel hate or vegetable enthusiasm.

Thank you for contributing to make the fediverse a more interesting place.

They are “regressives”.

“Should you have to pay for online privacy?”

This is the wrong question to ask. The obvious answer is no.

The real question to ask is: would you prefer to pay for an online service with currency, or with your private data?

What fun is it being the king of an unhappy, sickly, unemployable mob of peasants? Your dictatorship will not last a month.

You can label it whatever you want, when one party abandons good faith, we all lose, even if that party does not win. Democracy is a free market of ideas, which is only as strong as the average of ALL of its participants.

The concrete won’t even be cured by the time they need em.

An outcome that was on everyone’s bingo card.

You are right, crypto has nothing to do with currency printing. And yes, the environmental side too is a problem (unless it is produced inline with recycled energy) But governments issuing currency is a relatively recent phenomenon. Historically, people traded de facto currencies and IOUs amongst themselves.

Bitcoin was conceived out of the 2008 financial crisis, as a direct response to big banks being bailed out. It’s literally written in Bitcoin’s Genesis block. The point of Bitcoin has always been to free people from the tyranny of big government AND big capital.

Crypto isn’t that popular in developed countries with functioning monetary systems… untill of course those big institutions fail. I am still quite surprised, this side of Bitcoin is rarely discussed on Lemmy, given how anticapitalist it is.

I get it libertarian, bad. And to some degree, there are a lot of problems there. But the extreme opposite ain’t that rosy either.

That has nothing to do with AI and is strictly a return policy matter. You can get a return in less than 2 minutes by speaking to a human at Home Depot.

Businesses choose to either prioritize customer experience, or not.

Oh look, more anticompetitive shenanigans.

Break Google up. Bring the full force of antitrust down on them.

Anything else is an unmitigated disaster waiting to happen.