Did anyone stop to ask themselves if we even would want to watch AI videos?

Of course not.

I, and I suspect many other people, watch YouTube for the people in the videos and their experiences (or at least the illusion of that). Watching fake videos defeats the whole purpose.

YouAITube sounds like nothing more than a kaleidoscope with extra steps.

That’s what happens when you aren’t the (sole) paying customer.

Comparing employees to citizens is absurd.

• Citizens pay taxes and receive services
• Employees provide services and receive money.

The more apt comparison is voting citizens compared to shareholders. They too get a vote.

I think anyone familiar with the laws of thermodynamics could have predicted this outcome.

Uh, it’s a brick shelf made out of books.

If it’s such a problem, maybe we just collectively move on to ES or TypeScript nomenclature?

Gutting education is part of the plan for any authoritarian takeover. Knowledge is power. Why give the people the power? How very unauthoritarian.

As though CAPTACHA’s are that effective, and Joe Blow is personally responsible for the rise of AI.

Here’s a better idea for a movie: Sarah Connor kicks the teeth in of tech billionaire bros at Open AI, Microsoft, Google, NVIDIA. And Elon too of course, fuck that creep.

You expect to own your body? Hah, that’s cute.

Just wait for the enshittification of Neuralink.

It’s funny that with all our technology, paper is still the most durable storage medium (under normal conditions) that doesn’t cost an arm and a leg.

Sophistication often creates fragility. The human mind marvels at sophistication naturally; appreciation for resilience usually only comes after that fragile thing has broken. Of course it’s too late by then.

All them young whipper snappers will continue to learn these life lessons the hard way, it seems.

Because monkey brains’ kryptonite is outrage.

I’m afraid that’s not how the world works.

Unfortunately, the fate of the world kinda rests on the outcome of this election. From Ukraine and Israel at a minimum, to severe climate change and WW3 at the extreme end. I hate it too, but this is just too big to ignore.

Sounds an awful lot like most trilogies out there.

This is not how patents work. At all.

For one, patent owners are generally more than happy to license their technology to integrators, and even competitors, if there is money to be made.

More importantly, patents cannot be used to get exclusivity on products. Rather, patents can only protect novel approaches to how a product is made or served.

The patent system is designed to protect R&D costs exclusively, not some get out of jail card for anti trust. Of course, the patent office isn’t perfect, the system does get abused in anti-competitive ways. But in the end, it’s rare that that results in less consumer choice, because of licensing deals.

Is it incredible? Poe’s law hasn’t gone anywhere.

There is no rule that the angles of a triangle add to 180 degrees.

I think this is debatable. If it was not, then the answer to OP’s question would be obvious, and this thread would be uninteresting. The words we use carry a lot of unwritten baggage.

Leaving the information age and entering the disinformation age.

The problem is not the tech, as usual, it’s the people, who have been led to believe it’s AGI, who equate forming syntactically correct sentence with intelligence, and that that is enough to perform most white collar tasks.

Your logic is sound, but backwards.

Marriage is more analogous to a birthday. (A personal change in status)

Wedding is more analogous to a birthday party (i.e. the event celebrating the change in status).

As you pointed out in your logic, the birthday gift isn’t really about the birthday party, just like the ring doesn’t commemorate the wedding celebration, it commemorates your new marital status.

Unless of course you are the kind of person that is so focused on the wedding celebration that you forget the reason why you are celebrating to begin with (spoiler: you are making a commitment and entering a new life stage).

I think OP is on to something.