I've tried loading on Chromium but that doesn't work either it seems.
70 karma · joined June 3, 2022
I think there's an argument to be made that AI is being used here to help you tackle the more trivial tasks so you have more time to focus on the more important, and challenging tasks. Albeit I recognise GitHub CoPilot is legally questionable.
But yes, I agree with your overall point that AI has still not been able to 'think' like a human but rather can only still pretend to think like a human, and history has shown that users are often fooled by this.
Was that a problem before?
> Pundits always say that this is going to kill the old businesses - eventually that happens but not anywhere near as soon as they say.
So to me maybe he was implying that he did think that web apps would eventually take over, just not at a rapid speed.
A few months ago, I met up with a friend I hadn't seen for 2 years. Often, and for the entirety of the bus journey back home, I saw him scrolling through his phone. When this first occurred, I thought maybe he had received a message from someone, or that there was something important that he needed to do. I become curious so I ask him what he is doing. His response? "Oh, I'm just looking at Instagram." Perhaps it could be concluded that this is just the behaviour of one individual but I think behaviour like this is becoming increasingly more common.
I have endeavored in recent times to stop using my phone so much. In particular, I have completely removed Instagram, and Twitter from my phone, both of which feature endless scrolling. I absolutely do not regret doing so, nor do I miss these apps. Instead, sometimes I might read a book, or an article, or perhaps I'll just do nothing, and reflect on the day, and what I'm going to be doing next. And I think the issue with technology is that there's always something to do. With a newspaper, eventually you'll read everything you're interested in, and you'll stop. Same with a magazine. But when you're scrolling through Twitter, there is always something to keep you engaged, and to stop you leaving. And this is not by accident but rather it is intentional because, of course, the more time you spend on the app, the more ads you see. I now feel so much better mentally when I stopped such apps.
There are, of course, benefits to technology. If that weren't the case, I would not be here now. But I am a bit concerned that we are indulging to much in the distractions that technology brings rather than the amazing things it can do for us.
When it comes to free speech, many hear speech they deem to be abhorrent, and thus their reaction is that it ought not to be legal to say. And this feeling is understandable but perhaps demonstrates that the individual has not been educated on why to value freedom of speech. They often do not understand how dangerous it can be to allow someone to decide which speech can, and can't be allowed.
Additionally, I have been reading the book Fake Law, and what I have found striking is that large parts of the public are completely uneducated about the law, and why access to justice is important, and I myself learnt new things from the book. But the book also demonstrates how the media, and in turn politicians exploit this lack of education to slowly take away our rights, and restrict our access to justice. And this makes me reflect on my own education, and I now wonder whether that was intentional.
Switching companies is really easy. You just contact the ISP you want to switch to, and they pretty much sort out everything from there. Prices across the market are pretty similar although there is some non-price competition going on. For example, Sky (the UK provider of satellite TV) will give you a discount if you subscribe to their satellite service making your internet cheaper than it otherwise would've been. In the UK there is the concept of the 'loyalty penalty', a term not only used in regard to the ISP industry but also other services like gas, and electric. It is used to describe the situation where people who stick to one provider tend to be paying higher prices than those who frequently switch providers, and hunt for better deals therefore people are often encouraged to take advantage of how easy switching is.
I hear these stories from the US where people find they only have one provider in their region which is a completely foreign concept to myself. And when I was in British Columbia where some of my family reside, I noticed there seemed to be a duopoly on the ISP market: Shaw, and Telus. They also remarked on how expensive their service was. I don't know what the comparison is but it doesn't surprise me at all under such a market.
I think the issue here is not the problem with news in itself but rather the consumption of news. I think what is problematic is that people are consuming news like they would consume posts on a social media platform in that they're endlessly scrolling few news stories, and keep checking the app to make sure they're on top of everything that is happening. And I completely understand how problematic this is. However, that is not to say that news itself is bad.
There are several reasons that lead me to come to this conclusion. While I'm sure not everything in the news might not be directly relevant to you, I think it helps you make better life choices when you know the state of the economy, and issues others are facing. But, I think, most importantly: it is democratically empowering to be aware of the news. Let's take the UK system of government as an example. Some things are obvious: we vote for our representatives (MPs) every 5 years at the most, and this is one opportunity to influence government but its not the only one. We can: write letters to our MPs; create, and sign petitions; join pressure groups; protest; take industrial action etc. But we can only do this effectively when we have a good awareness of current affairs. Additionally, in the UK we also vote for our local government as well. This can include councillors, and (if your area voted for it) directly elected mayors. I hear many people complain about what their local council are doing, but a lot of these people don't even vote for any councillors. I once went for a coffee, and told the person at the till that I was volunteering at the council election. His response? "I didn't even know there was an election on today." Many of us are fortunate to live in countries with the right to vote amongst other civil liberties. We ought to use them effectively in order to improve living standards for us all.
On the topic of how we consume news, if we feel it is unhealthy to scroll through a constantly updated app, we can turn to bulletins instead. In the UK, the BBC produce half-hour bulletins on weekdays at 1, 6, and 10 o'clock (shorter bulletins also exist at similar times on the weekend). You could watch, say, the 6 o'clock news in the evening, and then be done with news for the day. You could also read a newspaper. This doesn't have to be in print as some newspaper websites are either not updated frequently (e.g. The London Times/Sunday Times which is only updated for major breaking news, or in the evening to give articles for tomorrow's paper), or provide a webpage that just shows you what was printed in that day's edition of the print newspaper (e.g. The Guardian/Observer).
As others have pointed out, there's a difference between creating something just for the experience of it, and creating something because no other similar solutions exist. This project seems to fit in the latter category hence why a justification has been offered.
I agree that people probably wouldn't buy games at inflation-adjusted prices. People would find it hillarious if a company came forward, and offered a base game at $120 (although we do sometimes see games with addons that cost this much; the Assassin's Creed Valhalla Complete Edition costs nearly £120 (British pounds) but this comparison comes with the caveat that this includes stuff that wasn't in the original base game.) But if micro transactions are considered the consequence of having high-budget games then, frankly, I don't want them. As I said, there are still some incredible games made by independent studios, and these games are often made at a fraction of the price of their AAA counterparts.
I suppose I can't complain too much because my solution is just not to buy, and sink money into high-budget games, and just opt for the smaller budget games.
I think that's the key point there. They have a history of making some amazing games, and still continue to do so to some extent. But their business practices in recent years have been, quite simply, abysmal. Stuff like not doing refunds at all (unless they're forced to by law), and also them guarding their intellectual property like their lives depend on it even when this is detrimental to their own business model (remember when they took a cut out of YouTubers making videos of their games leading to many just not bothering, and Nintendo losing out on publicity?)
I'm not much of a gamer anymore but I still enjoy playing them from time to time. I just feel like the gaming industry has being getting worse, and worse. Games are so monetized now that some are now borderline (or ought to be considered) gambling. At least there is still some amazing creativity coming from independent development studios.