the writer Nina Illingworth, whose work has been a constant source of inspiration, posted this excellent analysis of the reality of the AI bubble on Mastodon (featuring a shout-out to the recent articles on the subject from Amy Castor and @[email protected]):

Naw, I figured it out; they absolutely don’t care if AI doesn’t work.

They really don’t. They’re pot-committed; these dudes aren’t tech pioneers, they’re money muppets playing the bubble game. They are invested in increasing the valuation of their investments and cashing out, it’s literally a massive scam. Reading a bunch of stuff by Amy Castor and David Gerard finally got me there in terms of understanding it’s not real and they don’t care. From there it was pretty easy to apply a historical analysis of the last 10 bubbles, who profited, at which point in the cycle, and where the real money was made.

The plan is more or less to foist AI on establishment actors who don’t know their ass from their elbow, causing investment valuations to soar, and then cash the fuck out before anyone really realizes it’s total gibberish and unlikely to get better at the rate and speed they were promised.

Particularly in the media, it’s all about adoption and cashing out, not actually replacing media. Nobody making decisions and investments here, particularly wants an informed populace, after all.

the linked mastodon thread also has a very interesting post from an AI skeptic who used to work at Microsoft and seems to have gotten laid off for their skepticism

    • Tristan Harward@m.trisweb.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      @[email protected] @[email protected] @self Yep, it’s all the same protocol. It’s pretty weird though; no indication of what platform the post really came from or how it was intended to be viewed. I could see that being useful first-class information for the reader on whatever platform they’re reading from.

      Trying to remember how I even got this post. Did you boost it from your masto account?

      • Stephen Farrugia@hci.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        @trisweb @[email protected] @self yeah I figured the activitypub protocol used some kind of content type definition to control where stuff was appropriately published… I never got around to actually reading the docs.

        I have no idea how it came to your feed. I found it because you boosted it!

        • self@awful.systemsOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          as an open source federated protocol, ActivityPub and all the apps built on top of it are required to have a layer of jank hiding just under the surface

          • David Gerard@awful.systemsM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            ActivityPub is a protocol for software to fail to talk to each other

            @self has tapped Lemmy with carefully aimed hammers in a few places so that we federate both ways with Mastodon, which has been pretty cool actually

              • David Gerard@awful.systemsM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                so not very? If your Mastodon has authfetch enabled then it doesn’t work properly. If it does then it does. I’m on circumstances.run which has authfetch on - it receives comments from awful.systems but doesn’t seem to pass them back.