The Internet also brought us a shit ton of functional things too. The dot com bubble didn't happen because the Internet wasn't transformative or incredibly valuable, it happened because for every company that knew what they were doing there were a dozen companies trying something new that may or may not work, and for every one of those companies there were a dozen companies that were trying but had no idea what they were doing. The same thing is absolutely happening with AI. There's a lot of speculation about what will and won't work and make companies will bet on the wrong approach and fail, and there are also a lot of companies vastly underestimating how much technical knowledge is required to make ai reliable for production and are going to fail because they don't have the right skills.
The only way it won't happen is if the VCs are smarter than last time and make fewer bad bets. And that's a big fucking if.
Also, a lot of the ideas that failed in the dot com bubble weren't actually bad ideas, they were just too early and the tech wasn't there to support them. There were delivery apps for example in the early internet days, but the distribution tech didn't exist yet. It took smart phones to make it viable. The same mistakes are ripe to happen with ai too.
Then there's the companies that have good ideas and just under estimate the work needed to make it work. That's going to happen a bunch with ai because prompts make it very easy to come up with a prototype, but making it reliable takes seriously good engineering chops to deal with all the times ai acts unpredictably.
What's legal changes. There will absolutely be new ai focused laws enacted just like there were internet focused laws once the Internet became very impactful. We simply have no idea how this will play out. Whatever new laws are passed will definitely not kill ai though since it's a big business and us law makes will want ai companies to thrive so those services can be exported. People acting like ai will die for legal reasons are completely off base.
And payment sharing will most likely be a percentage of revenue and right now their biggest hurdle is just scaling, and it's incredibly rare that a startup with huge demand completely fails because of scaling challenges. Once they scale their profit margin will be huge, they'd be able to do payouts and still profit. But don't get excited about payouts, it'll probably amount to pennies like it does on Spotify.
Also, their biggest expenses are cloud expenses, and they use the MS cloud, so that basically means that Microsoft is getting a ton of equity in a hot startup in exchange for cloud credits which is a ridiculously good deal for MS. Zero chance MS would let them fail.
Chromium has always existed. Originally it was wrapping web kit and later they forked web kit into blink and diverged from Web kit. Chromium is a level above the engine.
IMO it's by far the worst on any apple product. I tried to help my mom organize some photos and it drove me absolutely fucking insane trying to figure out where the photos app stored things.
I don't think I've ever had a driver issue in Linux where something straight up didn't work, except for printers (but I've had printer issues with Windows and osx too, so that's more a printer than an OS problem). I have had to find different drivers when I want some very specific feature though. Really most of my issues with Linux are just because I'm trying to do something complicated in the first place. If I had simple usage I don't think I'd have any problems at all, vs Windows where sometimes it just randomly fucks itself up.
For obscure problems I actually find it easier to solve issues on Linux. The problem with Linux support isn't that it isn't out there, it's that there's so many variations that it's hard to know which one is right for your setup. It's the main reason why I stick with Ubuntu forks.
It's similar to chrome. Chrome is not open source, its base project chromium is. The VSCode distributable has closed source stuff on top which is mostly telemetry. There's a purely open source build of VSCode called vscodium.
It's not the kind of material that can start interested for more than 1 minute straight. The comics are fine when they're spread out to a gag every day or so
To really be successful you need to be curious enough to want to understand things at a deep level. With LLMs people who don't really care well learn even less than before.
Even with images, unless you're looking for it most people will miss glaring problems. It's like that basketball video psychology experiment.
The problem is definitely bigger with LLMs though since you need to be an expert to check the output for validity. I will say when it's right it saves a ton of time, but when it's wrong you need to know enough to tell.
Yes, LLMs are great as a research assistant if you know what to look for, but they're a horrible learning tool. It's even worse if you don't know the correct way to search for an answer, it will set you down a completely wrong path. I don't use any answer without cross referencing and testing it myself. I also rewrite most of the code it spits out too since a lot of it follows terrible programming patterns and outdated standards.
The Internet also brought us a shit ton of functional things too. The dot com bubble didn't happen because the Internet wasn't transformative or incredibly valuable, it happened because for every company that knew what they were doing there were a dozen companies trying something new that may or may not work, and for every one of those companies there were a dozen companies that were trying but had no idea what they were doing. The same thing is absolutely happening with AI. There's a lot of speculation about what will and won't work and make companies will bet on the wrong approach and fail, and there are also a lot of companies vastly underestimating how much technical knowledge is required to make ai reliable for production and are going to fail because they don't have the right skills.
The only way it won't happen is if the VCs are smarter than last time and make fewer bad bets. And that's a big fucking if.
Also, a lot of the ideas that failed in the dot com bubble weren't actually bad ideas, they were just too early and the tech wasn't there to support them. There were delivery apps for example in the early internet days, but the distribution tech didn't exist yet. It took smart phones to make it viable. The same mistakes are ripe to happen with ai too.
Then there's the companies that have good ideas and just under estimate the work needed to make it work. That's going to happen a bunch with ai because prompts make it very easy to come up with a prototype, but making it reliable takes seriously good engineering chops to deal with all the times ai acts unpredictably.