It’s like you didn’t read my comment.

If I say that receiving 2 olives on my side salad instead of 1 is “a premium experience”, it’s not possible to prove that assertion false but it makes the word premium completely meaningless in any practical way.

My point is, I’m not going to argue with you about your definition of premium.

Semantics.

Because they’re not premium features they’re just somewhat less shit.

Premium would be hookers and blow.

Semantics.

Let’s be honest, most share trading is more like gambling than it is like investing.

Because people are the product, and these anti-features improve the extortability of that product.

This is supposition but…

I imagine that disabling V2 is as simple as setting a flag during compile, at present. Obviously as the rest of the code base progresses it will become less simple to enable V2 support.

From a marketing perspective, the smart play is to say that you’ll continue supporting uBlock Origin and keep saying that for at least the next month or so, in order to gather up some refugees from chrome. Thereafter tell every one that your built in blocker is better than uBlock Origin anyway, and then drop support for V2.

Loads of people use Google workspace and most email clients have this feature, or if they don’t most people in customer service would just keep a document they can copy & paste from.

Regardless, if an LLM helps you with these tasks then that’s great.

A few months back my GP asked if they could use a transcription thing they were trialling during my consult.

He seemed shocked when I declined.

I just don’t understand why anyone would actually want that?

I want my doctor to listen to what I tell him, and I don’t really want what I say to be used for any other purpose, because no other purpose would be to my benefit.

Next week they’ll be adding to share “basic characteristics” about me with third party “wellness partners”.

Does anyone actually have jobs writing emails like that all day though?

Ticket systems often have an auto-response like “did you turn it off and on again”.

Most email clients or even gmail have canned response plugins.

IDK. This probably is a great use case and someone doing this might be quicker and better than me using canned responses or whatever… but only incrementally, not by an order of magnitude.

He has money.

People want money.

No, that’s quite obviously not social media.

This thread has convinced me that LLMs are merely a mild increment in productivity.

The most compelling is that they’re good at boilerplate code. IDEs have been improving on that since forever. Although there’s a lot of claims in this thread that seem unlikely - gains way beyond even what marketing is claiming.

I work in an email / spreadsheet / report type job. We’ve always been agile with emerging techs, but LLMs just haven’t made a dent.

This might seem offensive, but clients don’t pay me to write emails that LLMs could, because anything an LLM could write could be found in a web search. The emails I write are specific to a client’s circumstances. There are very few “biolerplate” sentences.

Yes LLMs can be good at updating reports, but we have highly specialised software for generating reports from very carefully considered templates.

I’ve heard they can be helpful in a “convert this to csv” kind of way, but that’s just not a problem I ever encounter. Maybe I’m just used to using spreadsheets to manipulate data so never think to use an LLM.

I’ve seen low level employees try to use LLMs to help with their emails. It’s usually obvious because the emails they write include a lot of extra sentences and often don’t directly address the query.

I don’t intend this to be offensive, and I suspect that my attitude really just identifies me as a grumpy old man, but I can’t really shake the feeling that in email / spreadsheet / report type jobs anyone who can make use of an LLM wasn’t or isn’t producing much value anyway. This thread has really reinforced that attitude.

It reminds me a lot of block chain tech. 10 years ago it was going to revolutionise data everything. Now there’s some niche use cases… “it could be great at recording vehicle transfers if only centralised records had some disadvantages”.

I couldn’t let an AI do any of this for me.

As in… I couldn’t let anyone make my emails more professional or whatever.

It’s not like I think my emails are always the best and can not be improved upon, it’s just that my emails are “me”.

I never have cause to write an email in a foreign language.

Can you give me some vague examples?

It’s obviously confirmation bias but LLM prose always seems so useless.

I don’t think they really need to.

Laws are often just an acknowledgement of a society’s expectation.

“We’ve all decided that kids under 15 using social isn’t great.”

The fact that this law exists makes it infinitely b easier for parents to establish and maintain rules in their household, because peer pressure is minimised.

Yes, some kids will still use social before they’re 15. Perhaps most kids. However, I think harmfully excessive use will be minimised.

Anyone who says preserving the status quo

This is an epic straw man. Usually I avoid calling out straw man arguments because you can frame almost any assertion as a straw man and ultimately it doesn’t further discussion. In this case though, you started it.

If you’re into logical fallacies, I will say that your argument is a false dichotomy. Between “societal collapse” and “status quo” there’s an obvious third option: “try to fix all the broken things”, which is what most people are trying to do. Both societal collapse and status quo are absurd propositions that no reasonable person would subscribe to.

You haven’t annoyed me. I’m sorry if my manner offends you.

No one in this thread has been able to demonstrate that human extinction is likely.

I didn’t say that the commenter said that. Ironically, you’re just strawmanning.

Anyone suggesting that societal collapse is a good outcome doesn’t really understand what societal collapse entails.

I also didn’t suggest that capitalism will save us - that’s another straw man.

Your metaphor is disingenuous.

This commenter is the fat guy eating burgers all day trying to bring on a coronary because it’s inevitable so you may as well get it over with, all while claiming that’s a better outcome than wasting time and effort at the gym trying to lose weight.