Do they really want the people who stayed on Facebook that drove out the initial wave of cool users to go to their new site and drove people away too?
I don't really understand Facebook's logic here. It's widely known that throwing money at a social networking site doesn't create sustainable growth, see Google Plus as an example.
Besides, it seems to me that Threads is just filled with blue checked celeb accounts nowadays and they (usually their social media person) barely ever post anything there, nevermind anything interesting or funny, and I don't think people actually care for that at all.
The building collapse was due to bad building code for sure; however, the apathy that followed the tragedy, both from rescue workers and the public at large, was really disheartening.
Insurance typically works off historical data to evaluate risk from my understanding, and having something as disastrous as the Miami beach condo collapse bodes a bad sign for insurance companies, especially given the terrible and absolutely incompetent rescue effort during the aftermath.
By the way, I'm shocked at how quickly the Miami condo collapse left the news cycle.
The most valuable part of reddit is always in the comments, as it has over time replaced forums to become the biggest central repository of (mostly relatively high quality) human generated English text data on the internet in discussion format, and even knowing this, reddit has never attempted to have a remotely decent way to search for information in the comments, as post titles can be incredibly vague or irrelevant.
This is the reason why using Google or another external search engine for reddit, because it is the ONLY way to find information in the comments.
If reddit does block Google crawlers, then it would make sense for Google to start prioritizing alternate source of open, high quality human generated data in their search engine optimization, and that would hopefully be the various Lemmy instances, which could be a strong driving factor in Lemmy's growth in the future.
Central Park is cool and all, but most cities could do with a large quantity of much smaller parks that people can walk to instead of one really big park in the middle of downtown.
The sequel is always a bit different than the original, right?
The original Gilded Age is also created due to advancements in technologies as a culmination of the Second Industrial Revolution: new methods of transportation from railroad and airplanes, as well as in communication from the invention of the telephone, which of course, would be the device of "distraction" as you described during its time.
I still think there is some kind of economic growth but it is not to the people and more concentrated to a few individuals and companies.
Do you not think that the Bezos and Musks are as the Rockerfellers and Vanderbilts, the robber barons of our age?
Of course, the issue I care about in particular: the labor strikes and fight for equality was never as great now as it was since the Gilded Age. The similarity here is eerie.
Please don't call manual laboring workers "unskilled" and disrespect their work: everyone has their role to play in the world, and if you sit in front of a computer all day for your job, then I doubt you would have the skills to do construction work.
I think the AI part of the article title is a bit of a clickbait, from the way I read it, the article was primarily focused on the reduction of usability in tech products due to the "growth oriented" mindset of tech companies adding more and more bloated features and ads for more profit, for which AI is a part of.
The "everything looks like a nail" part of tech oriented people that I could never understand: I've known people, real, very smart, people, who thinks more tech will solve every single problem in the universe by predicting then replacing the human with the omnipotent big data and machine learning; If the problem wasn't solved, that's because there wasn't enough data for the model and you simply need to gather more data and add more tracking to everything, instead of looking for a simpler, low tech solution.
I'm frustrated, because (correct me if I'm wrong) this kind of mindset seems to be common in the tech industry, the idea that automation and improvements in technology is ultimately imagined as means to eventually achieve a substitute for humanity in the form of the almighty dollar, instead of used to help humanity achieve more with less. I would expect it from companies, but not from real people.
It's made by Ben Zhao? You mean the "anti AI plagerism" UChicago professor who illegally stole GPLv3 code from an open source program called DiffusionBee for his proprietary Glaze software (reddit link), and when pressed, only released the code for the "front end" while still being in violation of GPL?
The Glaze tool that promised to be invisible to the naked eyes, but contained obvious AI generated artifacts? The same Glaze that reddit defeated in like a day after release?
Don't take anything this grifter says seriously, I'm surprised he hasn't been suspended for academic integrity violation yet.