LLMs aren’t a scam, I don’t even understand how you could twist it into such. While something like NFTs have no real legitimate use case, LLMs excel at translation and as an advanced form of spelling and grammar checking.
Your complaint seems to boil down to “it doesn’t work in all use cases it’s being used” which is fair enough, but if I put a car on my bed and try to use it as a blanket… does that make it a scam?
Why are you explicitly picking those examples, and not things like IoT, DevOps and Edge computing, all buzzwords, all successful and still in general existence today?
You’re cherry picking failed buzzwords and using them as proof that “AI” will fail.
To be clear, I agree that LLMs are bullshit for 95% of applications they are being put into. But at least argue in good faith.
Using the comments from Lemmy is clearly a case of selection bias. It would be like running a poll at a gym to see how many people think exercise is important. Or asking lemmy users if Linux is better than Windows. “The people I hang around have the same opinion as me” isn’t really a good litmus test for “does this actually represent public opinion.”
I highly doubt they have one team that switches between experiments and bug fixes, never doing two things at once. Not to mention that something ultimately being ripped out isn’t necessarily wasted effort. They could likely easily pivot virtually anything they put into this specific experiment into any number of other uses.
You’ve read the articles? Cool, can you give me a rundown of all the terrible things Mozilla has done in the past months?
Let’s say notifications are like walkie-talkies. You push a button, it sends an alert or your voice to the paired device. Neither one is storing the information, they are just relaying to each other. Now, in this case the government has issued a court order stating that a third party be given a walkie-talkie with the ability to understand the information transmitted by the first. There is still no storage being done, but a second party now receives all the information being broadcast.
It’s not about not having the information. You don’t actually need to store it anywhere to facilitate communication, at least beyond it being in memory which most would agree doesn’t constitute storage in this situation.
Now, could that third party store the information? Absolutely.
Depends on the site being used. Google? Most likely. But I’ve used dozens of others without any issues.
Capture and relay have nothing to do with storage. You can absolutely add storage, but it is in no way a necessary step.
My friend, did you read what the article you linked says? That isn’t storing the data, that’s capturing the data and relaying it, as directed by court order.
Ever heard of tenths? 22.1C isn’t noticeably different than 22.2C. And yet both are 72F.
Step 1: Understand all forms of DRM
Step 2: Deep dive on the game at a technical level
Step 3: Make a decision
Some people can’t even manage step 3 effectively, and you expect them to follow through with steps 1 and 2?
Not to mention “Dad can I have [game] I really really want it, it looks so fun and it’s all I want for my birthday” “Sorry Billy, but that game is anti consumer and locked into an always online DRM system, and I’m just not willing to support that.”
Like, c’mon. That’s just not how the world works, and we’ve known that for decades. That’s why consumer protection agencies exist.
Have to use? No one has to use any library. It’s convenience, and in this case it’s literally so they don’t have to write code for older browser versions.
The issue here isn’t that anyone has to use it, it’s the way it was used that is the problem. Directly linking to the current version of the code hosted by a third party instead of hosting a copy yourself.