Can someone explain why the fuck Google is pushing this so hard? Generative AI is not a general intelligence, and useless for concrete facts. Google has already demonstrated how shitty it is for information, and the people with the knowledge to work on the project have to know this.
So why the fuck are they all full steam ahead on something that will always be useless for them?
Same reason Facebook won't let you look at your messages through the website on mobile. (Unless you request the desktop site).
ISPs can't take your money if they cut off your internet
You can show support without starting a conflict about racism.
Offering to let the man go in front shows support if it is racism, and doesn't accuse anyone or start a conflict if it isn't. Same asking the cashier "oh, why you helping only me?"
Do you have a different understanding of the situation?
A new challenger joins the battle in the Elon / Cloudstrike "ruin an established company any % speed run" challenge?
Someone is racing Elon in an "any % speed run to completely destroy an established companies credibility."
The customization and software options I am currently using, I have been able to make 90% of it work with a rooted phone and a combination of many open source tools and more.
When I was using Windows I was able to get it to work 90% the way I wanted it to with a combination of open source tools, and help online disabling the bullshit. The point is I shouldn't have to put that much effort fighting my OS to get it working the way I want it to.
With a Samsung phone maybe I can avoid their bullshit by rooting the phone and finding open source software, but I'd rather just go with a different company and not have the hassle.
stop dooming lmaooo.
"This company has shit business practices, you should use someone else" is not 'dooming'.
People use devices that fit their needs.
Yes, and I'm pointing out why Samsung might not fit their needs in case they are unaware.
Apparently Pixel is the easiest to install an alternative OS on, going to start looking into that soon.
You can indeed prove certain properties on these models.
Okay, how does the model prove the assassination attempt happened? Because that is what OP was talking about.
It was clear from the context that OP was saying "It is impossible to mathematically determine if something [historical] is correct." They omitted one word and instead of using context clues you went into a long unnecessary post on how we prove even numbers are divisible by 2. If you tried Iron Manning their post instead of trying to show off with an "Um Actually...." You wouldn't be getting lost in the replies as we'd be staying on the original topic.
The main point though is that everyone including OP is trying to discredit AI by bringing up things it was never supposed to be good at.
We're missing the context again. It's not people trying to discredit AI. People are trying to discredit companies insisting on using AI for things it is bad at.
It sounds like you actually agree with OP: AI should not be used for this purpose. Instead of saying "I agree, this is a bad use of AI, it should only be used for X, Y, and Z" you felt the need to White Knight for AI. The problem right now isn't AI being attacked, it's companies treating AI like a miracle that can do everything.
My point is what OPs point was (which you veered away from in order to try to show off that You Are Very Smart): it is literally impossible for a computer system to prove a historical event has happened.
The guy who decided to start the battle increased ad revenue for a week so he got his bonus, that's all that matters.
"I'll glady tank YouTube's revenue tomorrow for an extra dollar today."