That’s what they’re banking on, but we know that eventually they will f*** it up and lose everyone.

Probably the pipes get ugly if the plumber is trying to install 11s and 22s. Probably they will have a different idea.

The article is also full of bullshit and it gets basic history wrong. The agreement was never made, but to the extent it exists anyway, it was never supposed to be about a monopoly that’s destroying shit. Once upon a time, not even very long ago, there were competing search engines.

I know tech writers want to write stories that sound fancy, but if they don’t know the facts and the history then they need to find someone to proofread their work more carefully.

And maybe that’s okay, isn’t it?

Why? That question always has multiple answers. Are you asking for a historical timeline? That might be the true story, but it also might not feel compelling.

Above all else, remember that Reddit feels many sources of pressure. They want money and users, but they also need to limit spam, and they don’t wanna piss off the rich stock holders, either.

Just what is a right, anyway?

Well no, it’s not, because they have multiple monopolies. So we should blame them and blame government for not stopping them.

Obviously the situations are different. We all know that. The point is that it’s hypocritical of a company to say hey, let’s ask our employees to do more by throwing AI at them, and then getting pissed off when potential employees do the same thing.

Although I think it’s more funny than anything else. The company found out that people are gaming the system, which means they have a really shitty system, and rather than change how they interview people or what types of questions they ask, they’re just acting obstinate.

I think we’ve seen enough changes in social media platforms over the past few decades to say that your claim is true until it’s not. As payments to content creators fall, and as garbage postings increase, the actual value to the average user of the site is clearly decreasing. So we’ll see how long YouTube is relevant.

So you’re saying that other options do exist but some companies don’t want to use them because Microsoft is very popular, which is kind of a circular thing, and I understand, but it’s a sign of laziness, not quality.

I have to quibble with you, because you used the term “AI” instead of actually specifying what technology would make sense.

As we have seen in the last 2 years, people who speak in general terms on this topic are almost always selling us snake oil. If they had a specific model or computer program that they thought was going to be useful because it fit a specific need in a certain way, they would have said that, but they didn’t.

One of the problems that the major news outlets have is that they repeat each other. It’s not merely an issue of AI compiling news stories, but that on top of the fact that all of these newspapers are doing hardly any research. For example, if you live in a town that’s not too large, there might only be one local paper, and they might send out reporters to local events. Obviously you would then go to that newspaper if you wanted to learn about local events, because they are adding explicit value.

But if you’re trying to read about national politics, a lot of the information is going to be the same in a lot of the newspapers. Which means nobody cares about the newspaper itself. And this is a creation of the newspaper’s own decision making over the past few decades.

The average consumer doesn’t care about that aspect though.

They do, of course. There’s plenty of rice of other kinds.

Exactly. Reverse DNS lookup matters in some situations.

That’s true but it doesn’t solve the problem now.

I like your general idea, but when you speak in broad terms and make claims that the election wasn’t rigged, when we have specific examples of ways that it was, nobody believes you except people who already did.

You could have said that nobody tampered with voting machines. I don’t think that’s true, because we have some specific evidence that people did, but we don’t have any large-scale evidence. So it’s quite possible that voting machine tampering was irrelevant.

What’s more relevant is things like disenfranchising voters after the election happened, and mailbox burning, and rules that prevent felons from voting, all of which benefit the Republicans. And gerrymandering of course. Those things all happened, and some of them were very large-scale. I think most people would say those count as rigging the election. So if you’re not talking about that, you need to be more specific.

If Musk actually does go to Russia, then I think any of his American investments will be up for grabs. That would be quite entertaining.

Yes, very publicly, but remember that they lie about everything anyway. So it’s not like the world is a better place because two pieces of s*** are insulting each other in front of the world. They could fight today and work together next week if they think it’ll get them more power and money, because that’s all they live for.

I think what you mean to say is that we should be pressuring public officials to try to bust up Google’s monopoly on many things. And we are doing that, and it is showing some progress. But there is much more work to be done.