She can go first then if that her advice.
How does one ‘learn AI’?
Ever see someone using Google and cringe? People who have experience getting AI to do what they want feel the same when they see normies writing their prompts.
Properly prompting an LLM is not something most people inherently get.
I haven’t used an LLM, but it’s probably similar to how people could not Google for shit. I always considered myself something of an expert at using search engines, although they’ve gone to shit obviously, and with the advent of AI it seems like they will fade out.
I don’t know, it seems to me that most people know how to ask a question or make a request. It’s not that different. It’s just that a lot of people don’t understand what is possible and they freeze.
You tell them, to ask for anything you want. They uncork and say “So I can ask it for a chocolate cream pie?”. Partially in jest, but they do that because they don’t seem to have a comfortable knowledge of the limits. A person with little technical background has no need for output that they don’t understand. Once you guide them a little and let them know they can get a recipe for a chocolate cream pie and some practical advice on how to make it, that might be helpful, but little better than just looking up a recipe. You’d have to let them know that they can find multiple variants of recipes and have it rank them, compare them, and produce a summary of the most popular types. By now they’ve stopped listening and have gone to the grocery store to buy a chocolate cream pie and you’re standing there hoping they will give you a piece.
In summary, I wish I had some pie. What was the question?
in unrelated news, washed up actor invests her nest egg in AI companies.
washed up? What are you talking about? She’s been the lead on two different, highly rated, shows for nearly a decade now. And that’s discounting her decades prior of accolades.
But here’s the real problem, you jump to call her “washed up”, she’s only 49. Is Brian Cranston washed up? Was Pachino? Calling a female actor “washed up” because she’s older with a long career just exudes and perpetuates the culture pushing out women as they age.
Just because YOU stopped paying attention to her doesn’t make her washed up. Sorry she’s not the bangable 20something year old “Legally Blonde” anymore. Say what you want about her hot take on AI, that’s fair, but don’t normalize your misogyny as part of it.
Ignoring everything else, “washed up” only means someone has lost their previous high status. It has nothing to do with age. You can be a washed up child actor.
washed up" only means someone has lost their previous high status
Which she has not. Unless you think that “losing high status” is synonym to “random pedo on the internet lost interest in someone”, which it is not.
When a woman says something they get judged much harsher. Plenty of research about this. People just want to judge women. The day has structure when there’s a scapegoat. Her point is still valid. Do your research before talking people. Please. I beg of you.
hilarious. JFC…The Morning Show?
She’s washed up and investing in AI, while simultaneously insulting women with real jobs by telling them their jobs are bullshit.
I mean, you said yourself she’s working on TV. It’s definitely a step down from the height of her career, and it looks like I’ve never even heard of her most recent show. Pacino is definitely in washed up territory, I haven’t heard anything about him since Jack and Jill or maybe that weird de-aged Netflix movie. Cranston is different in that he’s primarily a TV actor whose work has only become more respected over his career, although apart from the Malcolm reboot I haven’t heard much from him, so perhaps he is in the process of becoming washed. It’s all a relative thing and I don’t think misogyny played as much of a role in this comment as you’re arguing.
EDIT: Reworded my last sentence because misogyny is definitely a huge problem in Hollywood, I just didn’t appreciate you jumping down comment OP’s throat.
Is it, though?
Maybe she just made more money than she can ever spend and decided to just enjoy life, doing what she actually likes vs. what pays well
Daniel Radcliffe is a great example of that. He was set for life by the time he was 18 and he decided to just take jobs for fun. So we see Radcliffe in these rather obscure and weird quirky movies. It’s not because he’s washed up, it’s because he’s washed over and done and he’s just having fun
Not saying I know for sure it’s the same for without her spoon, but I think people react weird when an A list celebrity gets a bit quieter
I think you’re a making a lot of cope to defend casual misogyny instead of just calling it out.
“nono, you don’t understand, Cranston did tv first, totally different”. They’re both actors, and actors frequently alternate between movies and shows all the time. For various different reasons.
OP wasn’t attacking her views on AI, he was attacking her, as an actor. Using language that wouldn’t be used on similarly aged male actors (don’t like my examples, there’s hundreds others to use… DeCaprio? McKellen, Nicholson?). Language, mind you, that dogwhistles and normalizes popular misogynistic takes on women with long careers (especially if they started young).
If that seems acceptable to you but you earnestly believe Hollywood misogyny is a problem, you might want to do some self-reflecting on those two statements. Think about what it means to normalize attitudes and the words used to describe actors and how/when they’re applied.
Movies mean nothing now, TV is bigger. Well streaming is bigger.
cool, cool…Hey Reese which LLM’s have you invested in that you’re now advocating more women utilize them? OpenAI? Anthropic?
She’s not stupid. She’s trying to get a return on investment.
Neither of those are public yet.
I seriously tried looking for a connection with her portfolio’s available online, she seems clean and genuinely just advocating woman to use it.
That’s what it looks like right now, at least in public view.Don’t blame anyone in the slightest for the cynicism though in the current atmosphere.E: Welp, there goes my optimism.
That is also what it looked like back in 2022 when she partnered with World of Women to release NFT’s.
“While the crypto and NFT space is largely dominated by men, there are inspiring leaders like World of Women creating incredible communities for women during this massive shift for media and technology,”
Ugh, I seriously appreciate you ruining my optimism.
Even if your unfounded accusation was true, do you think her ROI would change depending on what she says to variety? She is not stupid. You? I have my doubts…
Yes actually, having a celebrity speak favorably about a company to boost sales and/or stock value is a thing, and owning stock in a company is an obvious incentive for a person to want to boost that stock’s value, fucking duh
Openai’s valuation is at 30B dollars and illiterate farmer at the end of the world knows what it is. If you think whatever RW tells pop culture magazine makes a dent in it, one way or the other, you need to recalibrate your tinfoil hat. Fucking duh.
Why do advertisers use celebrities in their advertisements? Shits and giggles?
Valuation based on fantastical quantities of bullshit, growing public awareness that bubble will pop sooner rather than later, extremely plausible that tech companies would enlist celebrities to help prop their scheme up as long as they can, cry about it
cry about it
You are the one crying about it, i am laughing at you ;)
Oh hey, i just found i am wasting my time talking to .ml asshole and genocide denier. Fuck off and bye.
I deny genocides that are fictional
I’m also getting my tax advice from Gonzo on LinkedIn.
What a sad state of journalism. Celebrity posted something on social. Opinions are divided. Commenters said this. Others said that. Thanks for looking at our ads.
She may be right, I dunno. I’m criticizing the publication and quality of the story, not the actor and alleged AI influencer.
We need Ja Rule’s opinion on this. Has anyone asked him?
WHERES JA?!
Planning a festival on a desert island?
I don’t think learning how to use. AI is going to save their job. Because AI will do their job there’s nothing for them to do. I’m not saying it right. I’m just saying I don’t think her advice is right.
Women tend to dominate care positions, nursing, teaching, and child care. None of them are going to be touched by AI, other than massive head aches caused in teaching kids to lazy to learn. Outside of those, women are in no different position than men when facing automation.
Less women are in fields like electrical, plumbing, and construction which are harder to automate and more are in things like customer service and reception. I think she’s just saying things, but I can understand why someone may have said that.
Staying ahead of the game to avoid becoming Reese Withoutherspoon.
She clearly learned nothing from her NFT grift hobby, which did not turn out well https://gizmodo.com/reese-witherspoon-seems-to-have-forgotten-how-well-her-nft-predictions-went-2000653047
Attack the problem not one another.
I understand advocating for women but this is a worker VRs the rich problem. Not a woman, bend so you can get a job problem.
