Like LLMs, they’re a sad technology for sad, stupid people.
LLMs are good for identifying plants. And transcription. And a bunch of other things I can’t think of right now. If you’ve ever had to do transcription by hand, you know the pain, and you’ll be so grateful to have a machine do it for you.
The problem is people trying to shoehorn LLMs into everything and calling it “Artificial Intelligence”.
“I saw all these comments about if you wear those glasses you’re basically a predator or a creep, and I was like, ‘Oh, maybe it’s not a good idea to have those,’” said Kujawa. "I didn’t really think that through all the way… there are a lot of times where it’s not appropriate to wear cameras on your face."
Words to live by.
CEO Mark Zuckerberg remains convinced that smart glasses will eventually replace the smartphone.
Sure, Jan.
The moral of Don’t Create the Torment Nexus is that you should create the torment nexus first so that you’re in control of it!
You got banned from the entire site for that?
Yeah, that isn’t how this works. You don’t want to be the one using the software while it’s still in beta. Wait until the dust settles before committing to anything. Besides which the super-urgent "You have to buy now!" FOMO sales pitch is a classic strategy for scammers.
There is no “AI”. Calling it that was a big marketing coup to make people think that they were buying intelligence. As of 2026, no computer is intelligent; you still need humans for that.
LLMs can be cool and useful in certain applications.
It’s already not bad for certain specific, niche applications. Check out PlantNet. It’s awesome. You can take a picture of a plant, and it’ll identify it for you. No micro-transactions; you don’t even have to log in. It just works.
Obviously, that isn’t one of the applications of Machine Learning that people have a problem with. It’s the LLMs filtering out your resume or spying on you or producing slop.
Yeah, this article is promoting the doomsday AI myth which is the narrative that these companies want us to go with, because it makes their products seem powerful. In reality, people are already turning against this technology en masse — not because they’re afraid it’ll turn into Skynet, but because it sucks shit.
You’re delusional if you think plan A has a chance of working on someone like Fetterman.
You’re the one who brought up Fetterman. If you want to run against him, go for it.
Most of our politicians are beholden to big money, not the people.
Okay, so then they can be replaced. Which part of what I said do you disagree with? If people can’t be bothered to make calls, then they sure as fuck can’t run a campaign. Because guess what you do in a campaign? A lot of fucking phone calls!
Voting them out is Plan B. Plan A is lobbying them (e.g. calls, emails) because it’s so much easier than Plan B. Sure, if they keep ignoring you, by all means, vote their asses out, but that is a task that is so much bigger than simply calling their office.
Call your representatives. Or email them.
Seems like the money is at its back so its going to happen,
Well, there’s certainly a lot of money being spent to make you believe this. I’m not buying it. Every day, dislike of AI grows. Meanwhile, AI companies still aren’t turning a profit. If the AI companies win, they’ll be in control of a public utility that many businesses will need to survive.
All you’ve demonstrated with this comment is your lack of imagination.
I haven’t had issues with bugginess in years, but it probably depends upon how you’re using it.
That isn’t the point. Why are you asking the question in the first place? If you don’t care whether the answer is true or not, you could just make up your own answer and save yourself some typing.
I still can’t wrap my head around this. If you don’t care whether or not the answer is true, why even bother asking in the first place?
It doesn’t matter how trivial the question is. If it’s worth asking, I want the right answer. If I didn’t care, I wouldn’t ask!
If you run a local model, you don’t have to pay for tokens.
It isn’t intelligence, though.
I’m skeptical he would win that suit. Google can just say that they had to enforce their rules regardless of whether the police think he’s innocent or not, and since they own the servers that his files were on, they reserve the right to delete those files if they decide to.