The cynicism on display here is little more than virtue signalling and/or upvote farming.
Sad to see such thoughtless behaviour has reached even this bastion of reason.
The cynicism on display here is little more than virtue signalling and/or upvote farming.
Sad to see such thoughtless behaviour has reached even this bastion of reason.
Plenty of people genuinely dislike the concentration of economic and computing power that big tech represents. Them expressing this is not "virtue signaling", it is an authentic moral position they hold.
Plenty of people genuinely dislike the disregard for labor and intellectual property rights that anything Gen AI represents. Again, an authentic moral position.
"Virtue signaling" is for example, when a corporate entity doesn't authentically support diversity through any kind of consequential action but does make sure to sponsor the local pride event (in exchange for their logo being everywhere) and swaps their social media logos to rainbow versions.
The problem with virtue signaling is that it’s parroting virtue for social praise. This parrot-like, repeater-node behavior often attempts to move the conversation to virtue talking points and away from the specific topic.
To be clear, this is just about online virtue signaling. It’s just as silly in the physical world - certain attire, gestures, tribal obedience, etc.
Moreover, if all statements made in such a context needed to be acted out in someway, that would negate the whole purpose of the abstract space.
The purpose of my rhetoric in this thread has been to illustrate the issues with your definition rather than to say something about myself.
Mindlessly parroting such talking points where they're not applicable is also a form of virtue-signalling.
And the comments in this thread are predominantly such virtue signalling nonsense.
The harder question that of risk management between the computing power we like on the one hand and its tendency to enable both megalomaniacs at the high end, and the unspeakable depravity of child pornography at the low.
Calling something "trendy" is a great way to try to dismiss it without actually providing any counterargument. The deep suspicion of anything Google does is extremely well justified IMHO.
If a tobacco company invested in lung cancer research that resulted in some treatment breakthroughs, that research should be celebrated, while their main business should continue to be condemned.
Please give me one example in the last decade where meta or Google research has led to actual products or open-sourced technologies, and not just expensive proprietary experiments shelved after billions were spent on them?
I'll wait.