Just sell it the same way you sell human created software that has no benefits (e.g. every phone game ever made).

Because Fox "news" just wasn't enough for them.

Golly, who could say no to that?

Well, you could, but seriously, there's no good alternative to Linux.

> There's nothing to indicate it can or will produce anything remotely approaching an interesting new take on anything.

You may be correct. I doubt it will matter much. As Mencken in 1938 said, ""No one in this world, so far as I know... has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people."

Yes and no. When thousands of amateurs are cranking out films for free and posting them publicly, some of them will be more popular than others.

Correct.

If you are not a tech person, right now from all the hype and news and bullshit, you would rightly assume that AI is an amazing revolution and you would barely have heard about its shortcomings.

Though that might've just been him thinking "stupid Europeans know only Moscow, St. Petersburg and Novosibirsk. I'll just say Moscow, close enough."

This. I've had to descend a mountain as the sun was going down once (got stuck at the top due to weather for some time, and when it let up enough for a safe descent, it was late). It's absolutely not fun, even when there's still some light. Had it been dark, I think I would've taken my chances staying at the top rather than going down.

That said, anyone not a complete idiot checks things like "time of last cable car" a) in person, b) at the day, c) at the location. Because even there is an official website that is well-maintained (and that's already two big if's) things might change at the location due to weather, workers being ill, no tourists that day or whatever.

Also, checking in person means at least one other person knows that you're up there.

Not to mention the porn industry.

It's not just the actors, it's the whole entertainment industry that's doomed.

Look, it's all about money and synthetic actors will always be cheaper. Eventually they'll be better. Even more eventually, your humble home computer will be able to cobble up a personalized drama, comedy, rom com or whatever you want, on command and there will be no more Hollywood, Bollywood or anything like a centralized entertainment industry.

Like the T800 in terminator, this can't be stopped. It can't even be slowed.

It's like there are at least two layers of funny money accounting going on here.

First, you have the strange way that people equate market cap with value. There's no guarantee that holding shares with a current market value of $X will eventually return $X or more in dividend payments plus maybe some eventual disposal of assets, and these are usually the only tangible values involved. A market cap based on ludicrously high P/E ratio will be high, but trading those shares is like trading Bitcoin: it starts to look more like a Ponzi scheme than a genuine value-based investment.

Second, even the market cap is mostly theoretical here, because any shares held can't be freely traded on an open market. The asset is almost completely illiquid other than occasional anomalies like the secondary sale we're talking about. The first IPO of an AI unicorn could be the pin that bursts the bubble.

It's the difference between being one of the AI unicorns that doesn't actually make any real profit yet and is largely funded based on hype and hope, and being a supplier like Nvidia that is actually being paid real money (funded by all the AI investment) and has a P/E ratio that is high but not off-the-charts stupid.

Microplastics are this generations lead in gasoline. Crappy processed food would be the second culprit, followed by vaping and whatever crap goes into that.

So, can you pay me all that research money now?

There'll be quite a market for people who can fix this crap.

Because drugs!.

There's a whole contingent of the USA population who put all drugs in one mental bucket and scream "drugs are baaaaad."

If the USA government was serious about drug harm reduction, then THCs and hallucinogenics would be legal and cheap so law enforcement resources could focus on cracking down on actually harmful drugs like meth, fentanyl, PCP and it's analogs and so on.

Eventually, less harmful drugs would crowd out more harmful drugs and drug associated health problems become relatively minor.

While the article does discuss a valid point which is that much of physics research is nonsense. The reason is that the whole system of grant funding is dysfunctional. It's not a conspiracy run by a secret cabal. It's just the usual case of institutional human stupidity.

AI is a tool. And like any tool its introduction creates proponents and enemies.

Some might say I'm a semi-professional writer. As in: I make money with things I write. From that perspective, I see both the AI slop and the benefits. I love that AI gives me an on-demand proof-reader. I don't expect it to be anywhere near a professional in that field. But if I want to quickly check a text I wrote for specific things, AI is great, because unlike me it hasn't been over that sentence 20 times already and still parses it completely.

As for AI writing - for the moment it's still pretty obvious, and it's mostly low-quality (unless some human has added their own editing).

The same way that the car, the computer, e-mail and thousands of other innovations have made some jobs obsolete, some jobs easier, and some jobs completely new, I don't see AI as a threat. And definitely not to my writing. Though good luck Amazon with the flood of AI-written garbage now clogging up your print-on-demand service.