There will be an intersection when the techniques and continued refinements in making tall tale signs of AI and new powerful model meets where it becomes very time consuming, expensive and difficult to tell between human generated and AI generated content.
We are already at a point where we can trick large number of the population, it can without a doubt close the gap even further where we question anything and everything.
Beyond forensics, which require large capital investment and operating costs, to be able to detect AI vs human content will be limited in terms of access. It will be so that its not that we can't detect AI content anymore its that most people cannot afford the service to detect it and thus they lose interest.
This has side effect of making live performances by humans scarce and in valuable.
I'm appalled that HN seemingly do not care about the human suffering that is going on in these medieval human slavery camps and instead focus on seemingly to regurgitate whatever talking points from their political leanings that were taught.
These "scam" centers kidnap, torture, even harvest organs from victims and have caused extreme violation of human rights but many of you seem more concerned with focusing your hatred towards Elon Musk or how your internet is being censored by this act.
Almost no modern telecom business will allow its customers to engage in terrorism and heinous criminal acts such as this.
This thread is the first time I am disgusted by HN users which in the recent years becomes indistinguishable from Reddit.
Still, on what basis do you, as a company, decide whether you restrict your services or not? Internet is like drinkable water. Imagine someone shutting off water to your area, because the little green elfs said so. There are myriad ways to kneecap these bastards, no, they decided to shut off the internet.
They target Korea and Japan as well. Thousands of Koreans have been kidnapped by this Chinese crime group. Voice phishing and now even kidnapping of children in South Korea by the same connected criminal syndicate has increased.
The hatred and suspicion towards Chinese is palpable and exploding into collective anger in Korea and Japan.
weird that the chinese are blamed. bc seemingly only the chinese government is actually trying to do something about it, getting these centers shut down and criminals "deported" and prosecuted
I disagree with labeling AI to be a cargo cult. Crypto fits the description but the definition of a cargo cult has to imply some sort of ultimate end in which its follower's expectations are drastically reduced.
What AI feels like is the early days of the internet. We've seen the dot com bubble but we ultimately live in the internet age. There is no doubt that post-AI bubble will be very much AI orientated.
This is very different from crypto which isn't by any measure a technological leap rather more than a crowd frenzy aimed at self-enrichment via ponzi mechanisms.
Jokes aside, what on earth is going on with the UK?
It seems to have serious demographic issues and actual ethnic English are understandably angry at having been largely vilified as Nazis and far-right for wanting to protect their heritage and identity.
To reach into draconian surveillance and censorship to quell its own natives of the land who has lived there for thousands of years at the behest of those that have arrived from far away lands with a drastically incompatible culture with the British is a recipe for civil war.
The resale market isn't shaped by technology but market demand which you frame it narrowly to what you place value on.
Otherwise there is no reason for old Porsches and 90s Japanese cars to demand the sticker price they do now.
The people who are willing to pay more for a used car down the road aren't interested in EVs or mass produced ICE cars, if unique enough will continue to be in demand over EVs
that makes no sense. an EV that cost $50k with or without subsidy that now costs half that is depreciation.
What's more interesting from reading the discussion here is that the depreciation of EV goes beyond the battery and thermal/geographic tax its that there is nothing special from the car market point of view that suggests a mass produced EV should hold its value against some truly sought after ICE cars that offer a unique novelty.
Even the Porsche EVs have not held their value very well compared to their ICE cars. There is simply no appeal to taste when you have to generate ICE sounds via speaker and signals EVs aren't very fun to drive or offer much novelty beyond the fact that its an EV compared to ICE cars where each engine is unique to the maker and has ton of parts all synchronized into a controlled chaos.
i think the union here is overreaching and expectations are unrealistic.
the stakeholders/investors have priority here and they have sold the company to the highest bidder.
at this point anyone participating or showing support behind union is at risk of being profiled and black listed in the industry and not just EA.
its in their collective interest to setup in jurisdictions outside the US where labor laws make the latter illegal but certainly not in many parts of the world and jurisdiction arbitrage makes it a very real probability.
my advice to anyone working at EA or any unionized white collar jobs in this nidustry and relate to keep your heads down and don't post your thoughts in public.
I think concern over company ownership is a core responsibility of a union.
> my advice to anyone working at EA or any unionized white collar jobs in this nidustry and relate to keep your heads down and don't post your thoughts in public.
That's one of the strengths of a union: established rules about what is an isn't acceptable, which include your right to speak out.
Not to be pedantic, but I think you mean "shareholders".
In the context of software, the term "stakeholder" means anyone who will use the project being worked on.
In the context of business, "stakeholder" is an intentionally nebulous term designed to obfuscate who is supposed to be enriched by the actions of the company. Usually that term is a way of deceiving people into thinking the company's goal is to serve "the community", when in reality it's serving the shareholders at the expense of the well-being of the community.
Sometimes, it's a way of deceiving the shareholder for the benefit of the executives, e.g. some "DEI" bullshit that hurts the community, the shareholders, and most of the employees just to feed the HR department and the C-suite's insatiable lust for power.
EDIT - I'd like to add a comment about "shareholder" and "stakeholder" sounding so similar, but in practice meaning two mutually-incompatible things:
This is by design. You're not supposed to be conscientious of the difference in meaning.
You're supposed to hear "shareholder capitalism's kinder, gentler successor", not "corporate-owned feudalism".
>Usually that term is a way of deceiving people into thinking the company's goal is to serve "the community"
It can also encourage workers to consider the needs of customers and suppliers, the ignoring of which will tend to eventually harm the company and its shareholders. I.e., it is not always a weasel word.
It's almost always a weasel word because if you meant customer you would just say customer. Saying "stakeholder" permits a level of ambiguity about whose interests are being represented.
If I mean "customers, suppliers, neighboring businesses, employees, their families, investors and anyone else affected by my decision", should I write that out or should I just write "stakeholders"?
Like I said, that's the engineering context of the word.
In business managerial side of operations, "stakeholder" is definitely a weasel word.
The word "stakeholder" in "stakeholder capitalism" as used by the World Economic Forum literally means "every single person on Earth". Unless you think Klaus Schwab also considers the possibility of life in the Andromeda Galaxy, it doesn't get anymore nebulous than that. The word "nebulous" describes something cloudy and ginormous- like a nebula.
I'm not trying to give you a hard time, but the rarity of the exception justifies the rule.
Their points are cause for unions to organize across companies and industries (though solidarity strike action is illegal in the US because it's effective). But they take for granted that employers should have their way and that employee interests are best served by appeasing owners.
The stakeholders/investors have nothing without the employees. The owners may have legal control of the company, but they can't force the company's employees to come to work, and their investment is worthless if that happens. That gives the employees some power here. There's nothing wrong with using it.
How significant? 5% of the company each? 20% of the company together? If you just mean they got a few hundred thousand dollars out of the sale, that's not "significant" at the company level. Significant stock ownership means you have a real say in the company's direction.
To be completely clear, EA is not a union shop. UVW (the CWA local putting out this statement) is a direct-join industry wide union. They have no contract or direct relationship with EA, though it seems (unsurprisingly) that some EA employees are members. As a legal matter they have no more relation to the EA deal than your local library does.
So yes maybe they're overreaching, but there's also very little for them to lose. Presumably they feel their labor power (unconstrained by the usual NLRB rules as this is not an NLRB-recognized bargaining unit) gives them some sway in the matter, but if not, they're not out anything.
Seems like a smart enough thing to try. If it doesn't work, they organize some more and try again later with better odds.
> ny advice to anyone working at EA or any unionized white collar jobs in this nidustry and relate to keep your heads down and don't post your thoughts in public.
I'd note that the workers creating the wealth and doing all the work are among the vanguard of workers doing the best in the world, but the advice given sounds similar to advice that could have been given to slaves on a plantation, in case the masters be upset.
The workers do the work and create the wealth of these companies. The apparatus over them is just parasites sucking their labor off into profits.
Whatever the immediate strategy should be, organizing, educating and agitating is the order of the day, for anyone with any sort of backbone or self-worth (of course narcissistic notions to consider oneself a genius and everyone else is dead wood, as someone put it here, has been encouraged).
It also doesnt make senes that someone who creates all the value wouldnt just leave and capture all the value themselves. It's not like they're being forced to work for the parasite. Oh wait - maybe thats where the slavery comes in.
> It also doesnt make senes that someone who creates all the value wouldnt just leave and capture all the value themselves. It's not like they're being forced to work for the parasite.
If they have a mortgage, kids in college, or just need routine health insurance coverage... they kind of are being forced to work?
Capturing the value yourself requires assuming a lot of risk, and most individuals can't access the kind of capital investment that a corporation can attract.
is there an open source version of this in github? i think i've seen something similar.
one off putting thing about installing the extension is all the reviewers seem to be Indian and I've seen similar patterns across Google Reviews where there is a flood of reviews from Indian users and they are almost always fraud or some weird scam
not saying this is the case here but whenever I see a bunch of reviews from Indian names, it automatically makes me trust whatever service or product less just fyi.
also this isn't a "lawless" region that OP is talking about they are in city centers in Cambodia and the Cambodian police and government officials are all getting paid off to let them operate freely.
it really is disgusting to see this level of corruption and that its going to have long term economic impact on Cambodia and Cambodians abroad.
We are already at a point where we can trick large number of the population, it can without a doubt close the gap even further where we question anything and everything.
Beyond forensics, which require large capital investment and operating costs, to be able to detect AI vs human content will be limited in terms of access. It will be so that its not that we can't detect AI content anymore its that most people cannot afford the service to detect it and thus they lose interest.
This has side effect of making live performances by humans scarce and in valuable.