No shit. If you cannot perform the simple act of getting along with another human being through respect and comprimise to build a healthy relationship, a fake “girlfriend” made to validate you and your bad behaviours will certainly make things worse.
This article is one woman speculating on the behavior of men by reading these speculative take of another woman who runs a domestic violence program, and the women who run domestic violence programs are basically guaranteed to have the most dismal harmful and misleading takes on the behavior of men and how we should treat them.
You need to wait for actual psychologists to weigh in on stuff like this, because both of the people involved in this article are terrible speculative bastards who have next to zero empathy or sympathy and should be ignored.
And for the love of fuck, stop blaming porn (or now AI chatbots) on guys not being educated on the way they should treat women. Blame the shitty school system and our culture that leads to parents never talking about this stuff with their kids.
I will just add a couple of opinions to the discussion:
1- SEX have ALWAYS driven the rise and diffusion of new technologies in a way or another
2 - Old gender stereotypes are… OLD. Yes we will have female assistant/sexbot/app/whatever but there will be male one as well as any other kind too. Anything will be customizable in real time anyway.
That’s a cute way of avoiding reading the article, but the answer to that question is far more complex than a simple yes or no, as the article itself will tell you. I found it enlightening.
that question is far more complex than a simple yes or no
But the headline does not reflect this...
It is a good way to avoid wasting time on bullshit headlines. If the article is good, and they come up with a headline like that, sorry they have lost me.
"This story is a great demonstration of my maxim that any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word "no." The reason why journalists use that style of headline is that they know the story is probably bullshit, and don’t actually have the sources and facts to back it up, but still want to run it."
Yes, nothing I said contradicts that. It can be answered with a no. It could also be answered with something else. That’s why the word can is used instead of something like “should”.
If the article is good, and they come up with a headline like that, sorry they have lost me.
what if I told you that the vast vast majority of headlines aren't written by the person who wrote the article, but by one of a any number of editors and/or layout designers?
Would that stop you from doubling down further, or are you in too deep now to admit you chose the wrong example for your snarky remark?
what if I told you that the vast vast majority of headlines aren't written by the person who wrote the article, but by one of a any number of editors and/or layout designers?
I would say that I have known that for decades...
Would that stop you from doubling down further, or are you in too deep now to admit you chose the wrong example for your snarky remark?
If my post was not here, would you have commented at all?
Lmfao, doubling down further it is!
Gotta make sure to protect that fragile fragile ego, eh? As you were, don't let me get in the way of your pathetic display.. 🤣🤣🤣
I tried signing up for shits and giggles but so far have been unable to create my own bot as promised, it always takes quite a long time and seems to end up failing eventually, no matter what prompt I used, which doesn’t exactly make me want to go out and buy their stuff though.
Almost feels like it’s a barely working prototype / tech demo and I’m wondering whether the data I see is actually from live bots or simply preseeded.
If someone else can confirm this, I’d be happy to delete the post, especially since, as another commenter pointed out, it isn’t even the first of its kind.
Honestly, I’ve spent a bunch of time playing with various AI tools recently and my conclusion so far is that while the tools are impressively capable and can definitely ease the burden of routine tasks, I’d still want to hire people if I needed something done that needs actual creative thinking.
An AI like Copilot can certainly help make a developer’s life much easier, but it can’t replace them entirely. All it is, in the end, is a better rubber duck, which can actually give helpful feedback or even produce whole code snippets for you, but you still need someone with an actual human brain to put it all together in just the right way.
For now… It seems to be getting better at an alarming rate. When I started using it last year it took several tries to get an answer that was about 75% correct. Now it can produce code that is 90-95% of what I need from a single prompt. I’m sure my prompting ability has improved over the course of the year, but the AI has certainly improved too. Coders aren’t needed for creative thinking, there are plenty of creative people who can’t code. I think it’ll be a while before it completely replaces coders, but it’s probably going to reduce the number of coders needed in the very near future. My job has been pushing us hard to use their licensed copilot within our IDEs and they’re tracking everything. I’m not sure the extent of what they can track, but they can certainly tell how often we use it because they’re giving us reports on its usage.
Even if that’s so, it still needs you in order to tell it WHAT to produce (and to get rid of the 5-10% errors that may still be present).
Also, consider that you may well be able to produce a single module that way, but a complex application consists of hundreds, if not thousands of these, and AI cannot yet meaningfully put them together as far as I know.
Yes, it may very well end up weeding out some of the bad coders whose only job was doing the dirty work of copy and pasting answers from StackOverflow, but as long as you got a brain in your head, I’m pretty sure you’ll still be able to find a job.
ai_
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.