knightly

Calling them a "currency" wouldn't be accurate either.

And the fact that they still exist as a fraction of a shadow of their former hype doesn't perish the fact that they have accomplished none of their stated goals.

Not as an untracable currency, not as a store of value, not as a medium of exchange, and most especially not as a thing to make government-issued money obsolete.

Cryptocurrency as a whole isn't worth the disk space it occupies.

You've switched from saying that a cryptocurrency's "primary purpose" is as a currency for transactions

That was someone else's argument, but it can't be denied that the original use-case envisioned blockchain securities as a currency.

Anyway. Are you aware that, assuming the Gartner hype cycle actually does apply here (it's not universal) and AI is really in the "trough of disillusionment", beyond that phase lies the "slope of enlightenment" wherein the technology settles into long-term usage? I feel like you're tossing terminology around in this discussion without knowing a lot about what it actually means.

I'm well aware, it's the slope down into the trough that will pop the bubble of "AI" overinvestment. I wouldn't be surprised if some application of LLM tech finds a profitable niche, but I'd be very surprised to see it in common use outside of automated copywriting for scammers.

No, it can't, because it isn't and cannot be made trustworthy. If you need a human to review the output for hallucinations then you might as well save yourself the licensing costs and let the human do the work in the first place.

If you think it can't replace anyone then why say "It can't replace anyone senior"?

That wasn't me.

Also, what licensing costs? Some AI providers charge service fees for using them,

Those ones.

but as far as I'm aware none of them claim copyright over the output of LLMs.

Hasn't it already been ruled that LLM outputs cannot be copyrighted, or was that just patents and I'm misremembering?

And there are open-weight LLMs you can run yourself on your own computer if you want complete independence.

Ah yes, because rolling your own unreliable text generator is so much less expensive. XD

It's also downsizing from when tech companies went on a hiring spree during the early years of the pandemic.

You misspelled "Unlicensed Securities", and taking crypto scammers at their word when they tell you how much their bits are worth is an easy way to lose actual money. XD

Why do you think that's its primary purpose? It has lots of uses. The point is that it's doing fine, it hasn't "gone away."

Sure, that's why I only ever hear about unregulated securities when a scam makes the news. XD

Your criterion for a "bubble popping" is that the technology doesn't grow to completely dominate the world and do everything that anyone has ever imagined it could do? That's a pretty extreme bar to hold it to, I don't know of any technology that's passed it.

My criterion for a bubble pop is the sudden and intense disinvestment that occurs once the irrational exuberance wears out and the bean counters start writing off unprofitable debt.

Given that so-called "AI" is falling into the trough of disillusionment, I'd expect it to begin in earnest within a few months.

So it can replace people lower than "senior?" That's still quite revolutionary.

No, it can't, because it isn't and cannot be made trustworthy. If you need a human to review the output for hallucinations then you might as well save yourself the licensing costs and let the human do the work in the first place.

But this one definitely is.

It's like watching the Blockchain saga in fast-forward.

It's the same at my employer, which has wasted untold thousands on subscriptions to ChatGPT and CoPilot and all we've gotten out of it so far is a script that takes in transaction data and spits out "customer loyalty recommendations".. as if we don't already have a marketing department for that. XD

It's only a matter of time 'til the "AI" bubble really pops and all those tech companies that fired too much of their workforce have to start hiring back like crazy.

Precisely.

Wiretapping laws aren't enforced because of copyright.

Sure, but Facebook would prefer a copyright case over anything that might suggest a bill of privacy rights would be a good idea.

You were the deraileur when you decided that my comment about my own personal tastes was insufficiently generalizable. XD

Wiretapping laws would seem to disagree. XD