though he’s correct in saying the ethics of language models aren’t a self-solving issue, even though he expresses it in critihype-laden terms.
the subtext is always that he also says that knows how to solve it and throw money at cfar pleaseeee or basilisk will torture your vending machine business for seven quintillion years
i think you've got it backwards. the very same people (and their money) who were deep into crypto went on to new buzzword, which turns out to be AI now. this includes altman and zucc for starters, but there's more
is the evil funding man going to eat the gimp pepper
it's maybe because chatbots incorporate, accidentally or not, elements of what makes gambling addiction work on humans https://pivot-to-ai.com/2025/06/05/generative-ai-runs-on-gambling-addiction-just-one-more-prompt-bro/
the gist:
There’s a book on this — Hooked: How to Build Habit-Forming Products by Nir Eyal, from 2014. This is the how-to on getting people addicted to your mobile app. [Amazon UK, Amazon US]
Here’s Eyal’s “Hook Model”:
First, the trigger is what gets you in. e.g., you see a chatbot prompt and it suggests you type in a question. Second is the action — e.g., you do ask the bot a question. Third is the reward — and it’s got to be a variable reward. Sometimes the chatbot comes up with a mediocre answer — but sometimes you love the answer! Eyal says: “Feedback loops are all around us, but predictable ones don’t create desire.” Intermittent rewards are the key tool to create an addiction. Fourth is the investment — the user puts time, effort, or money into the process to get a better result next time. Skin in the game gives the user a sunk cost they’ve put in. Then the user loops back to the beginning. The user will be more likely to follow an external trigger — or they’ll come to your site themselves looking for the dopamine rush from that variable reward.
Eyal said he wrote Hooked to promote healthy habits, not addiction — but from the outside, you’ll be hard pressed to tell the difference. Because the model is, literally, how to design a poker machine. Keep the lab rats pulling the lever.
chatbots users also are attracted to their terminally sycophantic and agreeable responses, and also some users form parasocial relationships with motherfucking spicy autocomplete, and also chatbots were marketed to management types as a kind of futuristic status symbol that if you don't use it you'll fall behind and then you'll all see. people get mixed gambling addiction/fomo/parasocial relationship/being dupes of multibillion dollar advertising scheme and that's why they get so unserious about their chatbot use
and also separately core of openai and anthropic and probably some other companies are made from cultists that want to make machine god, but it's entirely different rabbit hole
like with any other bubble, money for it won't last forever. most recently disney sued midjourney for copyright infringement, and if they set legal precedent, they might take wipe out all of these drivel making machines for good
iirc L-aminoacids and D-sugars, that is these observed in nature, are very slightly more stable than the opposite because of weak interaction
probably it's just down to a specific piece of quartz or soot that got lucky and chiral amplification gets you from there
also it's not physics, or more precisely it's a very physicy subbranch of chemistry, and it's done by chemists because physicists suck at doing chemistry for some reason (i've seen it firsthand)
deserved tbh
gg is ancient, and also requires so little resources that there's barebones client released as openwrt package
that watermark makes it look a bit like album cover
internet funeral material
i mean while there's a lot of pretend-work (promptfondlers) and pretending that chatbots work (managers pushing for use of chatbots, entire openai and their vcs) the people who do that to my understanding are on the highly paid side. until the bubble collapses, that is
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines
no
not yet at least, but this might change soon