Hes right. I lurk places that arent anti AI and apparently its gotten insanely good this year and insanely cheap. I have no idea how any one is going to make money off this race to the bottom.

No I think that quote is attacking AI haters. Hes saying the people who say ai code has issues should look in the mirror because so does theirs.

He did business as usual with a better social media presence

“Soon” they can barely do basic calculations and they only last a month.

24gb of ram in a phone they really were just giving it away back then

The trump admin is extremely soft on crime.

“hello ladies and gentlemen I am the spiffing brit and welcome to LAX Air Traffic control”

Selling to consumers is charity at this point. They are such a tiny portion of the market. Consumer will lose always unless regulations step in.

Witg finite supply casual users will lose against people using computers to make money.

Im calling the police if my partner takes out 22k for a ring.

What a solid pitch

Nah thats correct kurzgesagt is slop

I would hope the US wins and copyright dies.

To bad US copyright is only sometimes enforced. You ain’t a US record label so good luck.

Everyone who got tariffed needs to drop the us copyright act. Its so cucked to have this in exchange for free trade then get tariffed. Then have the US blatantly disregard copyright and in front of everyone but still enforce it on non American companies.

Thats not what I’m arguing. I’m saying most people dont care enough either way and based off research and polling ive seen that most people do use the features. So if most people use them and only a tiny fraction wants them gone you should keep them default and give those people a toggle.

When I’m saying 175k out of 100m I’m pointing out that its a tiny % of the user base. The people who were engaged enough to vote in that poll were the anti AI people. It was posted to all the anti AI subreddits and twitter feeds. It was a big call to action to try and prove no one wants it.

Its obviously where search is heading which is why ddg mentions in their blogs that they are working heavily on AI features. They have always been receptive to users so unlike google so they do give users the option to disable. If they had data that most were disabling we’d see that be the default.

How do you know? Im sure 1% do

No search will ever give you the correct answer 100% of the time so I dont know why you’d draw such a dumb line in the sand.

I mean unless you dont use search engines, don’t use libraries, don’t talk to humans.

This stat is people who use llm chatbots for search. It excludes summaries. I think that had 60% saying they did read the summaries 10% saying not sure and rest saying they didnt.

get them to sign up to whatever instance you’re on and dont even bother telling them there is other stuff out there until they’re settled in.

Can someone articulate what is wrong with this? It intrinsically feels wrong to me, but when I think about it I dont really have any good reasoning why this would be bad.

We expect a standard price and it feels bad when we find out someone else got it cheaper.

But the consumer should be operating the same, they review the deal and if its a price they are willing to pay they go through with it.

People are intentionally going to LLM chatbots to search. This is not including viewing of AI summaries as AI search.