I don't know why you want to use an AI to purchase goods and learn about products. That's what the current www is really really strong at. Lots of people are spending an awful lot of money to make that information really easy to discover, and popular search engines definitely prioritise that information.
Also, if an AI is to give you price and product information it's going to have to be reading live web pages, which will of course be full of ads. SEO will become AIO/LLMO. There is no end to the time and money advertisers are prepared to pour into getting products in front of users. The irony is that you seem to want to view products and you have this weird perspective where you're keen to avoid ads for products so that you can view marketing information about products without the ads.
It's already fairly hard to tell without knowing some good websites or reading through to conclusions and using some common sense whether a review website is honest or biased. I don't know why you think an AI with access to the Internet will filter out fake reviews and content crafted to lead you to specific products over others.
Also, downloading and configuring your own AI is unlikely to be the way the "AI revolution" comes. Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Apple and other mega corporations will be funding the "AI revolution" and will not sit idly by allowing their kingdoms to crumble.
The number of people who will be saved from the corporations that run the online world by open source grass roots AI will be smaller than the number of people who are saved by Linux from proprietory products and SAAS.
Yeah, everyone will get used to using an AI to interact with the web, but it will be freely supplied by a corporation, and I PROMISE you the enshitification of AI has been long planned before we even reach step one of making it awesome for the masses.
You can't just let it lapse, you have to hunt out that cancellation option three to six pages deep and be determined. Then you need to carefully swerve the highlighted get it fast option and find the free delivery one instead. Don't get standard delivery, free delivery comes sooner than they claim because whilst the courier isn't being paid to hurry it, they're coming to your area soon anyway and may as well.
Besos could easily have the best paid workers, with the best conditions, the best customer service, require delivery that cares, ensure the best quality goods, and still be over a hundred thousand times richer than a millionaire, but he doesn't. He wants the extra money more. So much power, so much money, so much squeezing the normal folk just a bit harder for a bit more profit.
Sorry, genuinely didn't realise telling you this would be so unhelpful to you, but now I realise that maybe you might prefer to just look in the settings on the app, if you don't want to open up a discussion.
And... I assumed some other people were still experimenting with apps for lemmy and might like to know that this feature is available in at least one of them, to help them decide. I don't quite understand why my honest attempt to provide useful information upset so many people.
That was a fairly abusive way of disagreeing. If you think I'm so stupid for repeating what a chemistry teacher said about a chemical, perhaps a politer way of pointing this out would be to point to some of the overwhelming evidence you feel I should have noticed sometime in the last forty years, and maybe you could find it in your heart to do so without calling me a bad, stupid, parroting, moronic moron, which I personally feel was a little over the top.
I feel I can explain this discrepancy with a bit of history.
TL;DR in the last paragraph.
The EU has a numbering system for additives, preservatives, colourings etc that have been tested and approved for human consumption, so instead of putting Sodium Sulphite, you can put E221. They used to be very very commonly listed in ingredients in the UK. The difference between Sodium Sulphite (E221) and Sodium Hydrogen Sulphite (E222) is unclear and unimportant to most consumers, so manufacturers just listed the "E numbers" instead.
In the UK, when it was discovered that certain food additives can trigger conditions such as ADHD, instead of naming the specific chemicals that were causing the problem, the British media just called them E numbers.
Cue a fair bit of hysteria about how E numbers are harmful and some legitimate concerns, and suddenly the public start checking their food to see if it has any of those nasty E numbers, and they find to their horror that a lot of processed food contains a lot of E numbers, because preservatives, flavour enhancers, food colourings, sweeteners make food more appealing, and people re-buy appealing food. Suddenly it's very much in the manufacturers' interests to name the chemicals instead of the shorter E number so even today in the UK it's more common to name the chemical than the E number, which was never required anyway. To prevent hysteria over "chemicals" in food and to inform, it's become common to label then with their purposes - flavour enhancers, colours, preservatives etc.
There's still some really quite noxious chemicals that are perfectly legal to put in food. My son's A-level chemistry teacher saw him drinking the same brand of squash every day and commented "You drink a lot of that. Are you sure there's no aspartame in it? There's no way I would deliberately put aspartame inside my body." Make of that what you will.
Anyway, the media storm around E numbers dies down because the manufacturers largely just avoid naming them that way, and carry on pretty much as before. Some kids have had reactions and occasionally news stories come out, but the media persist in avoiding using chemical names.
There's some perfectly sensible advice that says that it you eat less processed food, and especially less "hyper-processed" food, and instead eat more food made from more natural ingredients, you get a more balanced diet with better vitamin and mineral intake, thus feeling feeling fuller for longer. (If the food is designed, with proper experimental testing, to get you to buy it more, it is inevitably also designed to get you to eat it more than you need to.)
But how can you tell if the food is processed or not? What's the difference between me spending half an hour mixing the ingredients and then mixing them for me and precooking it so I just bung it in the pan? Well, a random member of the public almost certainly has salt and pepper, maybe even a few herbs and spices, but probably not any L-alanine. Look out for ingredients that you wouldn't use at home, they're probably a sign that it's highly processed.
Hence the nearly good information that there aren't any artificial flavours or colours. Nearly good, because it doesn't mention preservatives and nearly good because it is definitely and certainly processed food designed to maximise profits rather than health.
So the UK food processing industries continue to aim naturally for maximising re-buying which includes reassuring the consumers that this is the healthiest (pre-prepared, highly processed, addictively tasty) low-priced convenience food they can, whilst being attractive to supermarket profits with longer shelf lives. If the bacteria and mold-killing preservatives aren't as kind to human biology as just making it yourself and eating it sooner, and a few people have had reactions, it's just not obviously bad enough for it to be something people will do anything about.
**TL;DR ** So, my understanding is that the hysteria about artifical flavours and colours was highest in the UK and the folks from the other countries aren't looking for technicalities to reassure them about the ingredients because they were never trained by their media to hunt for nasties in the small print - those that care can see straight away this is very firmly in the processed food category, and those that don't, don't.
I was fired for "fraternisation in the workplace". Teenage me was caught snogging the boss's daughter, no less, in the stock area by said boss. Cue "get your hands off my daughter" (he didn't know we were dating) and a meeting later that day being told much more calmly I was being let go for fraternisation. I said it was unfair because he kissed his wife in front of us the previous week, and he said "not that way," and he had a point, but it was still obviously unfair.
Anyway, we started deliberately dating in secret instead of her just not really telling him, and when she rang me she always called me Samantha, which I then used to find exciting (Freud eat your heart out).
I'm convinced that she found it exciting to be disobeying her dad, and would complain to me about her dad saying something like "he's just trying to take advantage of you" and we would reassure each other that I wasn't but she would be much keener those days, it felt like.
When you're a teenager and you find a magic button that gets you nice things, you don't hold back on pressing the button, so if she got a bit unenthusiastic about meeting up, I'd just ring her at home knowing full well that her dad would shout at me if he answered and her mum would quietly also refuse to put me through but tell her to stop me from ringing because it might upset her dad. She'd argue with her parents and get revenge by seeing me and behaving in a manner she new her parents to find improper.
It was really fun while it lasted, but in the end I felt like I shouldn't have to provoke her dad to get with her and stopped doing it. We drifted apart, I don't know whether her heart wasn't in it when she wasn't cross with her dad or I just started worrying about that too much, but I'm pretty sure her dad had been my unintentional wing man all those months. I really think it's properly messed up.
She later dated a guy who I think really was trying to take advantage of her. Also messed up.
Anyway, I got a job at the big chain version of his store and of course she and her friends started shopping there, which resulted in more arguments with her dad.
I guess the moral of the story is make sure you're on good terms with your teenage daughter or she might just go against everything you said just to spite you.
Well it's not a proposed bill and so they'll do some hand wringing and say some platitudes but nothing will come of it because the government has other priorities.
Yeah but javascript has 473 popular frameworks and counting, and the churn is immense. Your codebase becomes out of date before you've finished writing it.
And the debugging?! I'll try to finish writing this paragraph despite the uncontrollable twitching. Let's just say that javascript is the kind of language that looks at your car with a missing left front wheel and says "let's go", while your IDE whispers "Yes, but maybe just don't turn right. Certainly don't turn right fast, unless you want to of course."
The Bloomberg website was messing with me. I'm here via lemmy. The fediverse tends to play nice with browsers. It's when commercial websites are trying to DRM their pages that you get problems.
I should have said "that website" not "this website", sorry for the confusion.
My browser is aggressively anti-tracking and probably borks the page because the page is aggressively paywally and cookie-laden. I've found the archive.is website now, at least. This particular article is at https://archive.is/baEUV Works fine on the archive, which shows it was all about the unnecessary website behaviour.
I don't know why you want to use an AI to purchase goods and learn about products. That's what the current www is really really strong at. Lots of people are spending an awful lot of money to make that information really easy to discover, and popular search engines definitely prioritise that information.
Also, if an AI is to give you price and product information it's going to have to be reading live web pages, which will of course be full of ads. SEO will become AIO/LLMO. There is no end to the time and money advertisers are prepared to pour into getting products in front of users. The irony is that you seem to want to view products and you have this weird perspective where you're keen to avoid ads for products so that you can view marketing information about products without the ads.
It's already fairly hard to tell without knowing some good websites or reading through to conclusions and using some common sense whether a review website is honest or biased. I don't know why you think an AI with access to the Internet will filter out fake reviews and content crafted to lead you to specific products over others.
Also, downloading and configuring your own AI is unlikely to be the way the "AI revolution" comes. Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Apple and other mega corporations will be funding the "AI revolution" and will not sit idly by allowing their kingdoms to crumble.
The number of people who will be saved from the corporations that run the online world by open source grass roots AI will be smaller than the number of people who are saved by Linux from proprietory products and SAAS.
Yeah, everyone will get used to using an AI to interact with the web, but it will be freely supplied by a corporation, and I PROMISE you the enshitification of AI has been long planned before we even reach step one of making it awesome for the masses.