X is the public square. The algorithm is superior to any other social media site out there right now. They are right to charge for the API and right to shut down impostor sites.
What did they say around 2020? If you don't like it - BUILD YOUR OWN.
"Early" works for an open-ended bubble thesis. It does not rescue dated claims that already failed.
Google's 500 million Gemini-user goal had an end-of-2025 deadline. Zitron called it so unrealistic that Sundar Pichai should be fired. Google reported more than 650 million monthly users by October.
"AI had already peaked" is also a claim about the state of the technology at that time. Agent and coding benchmarks moved sharply after it. The fact that every technology eventually peaks does not make a past claim that it already peaked correct.
The bubble may still burst. That would validate the bubble thesis. It would not retroactively fix the prediction record.
btw Zitron has the only fan base that has come after me with doxxing and death threats so far. Truly misery loves company!
Some numbers have a lot of squish to them. Gemini can't be called a failure. But Copilot is a flop and yet Microsoft can probably show you similar numbers to what Gemini has.
But we’re talking about Gemini, which is one of Dan’s point: the surface area is so large that any prediction is almost laughable. Zitron’s prediction here is laughable in fact because he claims both (1) Pichai is jamming AI everywhere and (2) the 500M number is impossible. Those statements are immediately contradictory to anyone who understands the scale of Google’s products.
> The bubble may still burst. That would validate the bubble thesis. It would not retroactively fix the prediction record.
If it does not burst it will be because specific efforts have been taken to deflate it in the face of concerns like those he is raising.
The bubble may not burst for example if the securitization of AI debt really happens. Then when it happens it won't be an "AI bubble" that bursts, it will be a full-on collapse of the US economy. Like when 2008 happened it wasn't really about mortgages anymore.
I am right up the road from Casa Grande. I run a youtube channel with 30k subs and have recently gotten VERY INTERESTED in investigating Flock/Deflock. I had no idea the cameras were everywhere.
I'll reach out anywhere on the site but feel free to get in touch here as well. I want to interview the creator and broadcast the situation in Casa Grande.
edit: emailed the address on the site. Anyone else on the east valley working on similar efforts should give me a nudge in the comments.
From my perspective, I do not perceive the world as "falling apart" and I wonder how much of your perception of the state of things (as if there was a universally defined "perfection" to strive towards instead of humans creating these concepts) falling apart is derived from your faith, which has a vested interest in presenting itself as a real-feeling thing in order to promulgate its existence. As a meme, it appears to be persistent in the environment for roughly 2k years, so clearly there's some fitness to its host species. And contrast its feelings of apocalyptic end times to Buddhism, where things are more cyclical rather than ending soon, and I wonder how your feelings would be affected were you to have been raised in that environment instead.
While I can't speak to the universality or novelty of the world falling apart, I feel the same way.
Some people aren't yet in a place to understand this perspective. Others have been hurt by Christians who failed to live their faith or were otherwise misguided in their actions or teachings. Some slander the faith based on ignorance or misunderstanding.
We're called to forgive our enemies and respond with patience, humility, and compassion. I've found that doing this without losing sight of God's commandments is a struggle that requires daily prayer and reflection.
A thing you might want to consider is that how "good" a person is is largely independent from their level of religious faith.
It is common for religious people to assume they are linked and that a religious person does good deeds because they are faithful while somebody who does bad deeds has less faith.
Which leads to an assumption by some that atheists are have no morals and priest are exception good.
I was raised atheist/agnostic and was one for decades. Now that I'm not, I frequently get unsolicited comments like the one you're responding to. People assume that I haven't considered foundational tenets of my religion, or that they're the first ones to raise basic ethical questions after thousands of years of tradition, teaching, and catechism.
There's a noticeable difference between those who are concerned but care about what I think, and those who have already made up their minds that I'm ignorant. It's tough, especially when it surfaces in longstanding relationships. I've had friends and family jump to all kinds of crazy conclusions about what I believe and why.
I'm not perfect, and I often reflect on whether I'm setting a bad example or being a poor witness to something that's a powerful source of strength and charity. Many times I've fallen short, and I ask for forgiveness. Christ asks me to pick up my cross and follow Him, and I pray for the humility and discernment to do so.
its a gracious outlook of you, to assign ignorance as the root cause of this behaviour. to me that dude looks like any other proselytizer - a man attempting to sway others views, without concern for their concerns. although if you try showing atheist proselytizers how similar they behave to preachers, or indeed compare any of their behaviour to religious zealots, this inevitably short circuits the proselytizer viewpoint and forces fight mode, resulting in termination of any productive discussion.
at the end of the day people say a lot of things, and until life teaches how little words matter, people do care about words by default. it is only those understanding life who look past words to see what truly matters. everything that anything living does in this existence is inherently selfish, otherwise it wouldnt happen, based on science and neurochemistry. this seeming impediment to becoming christlike is not an insurmountable obstacle, rather a beautiful choice we are offered - to accept animality, or to humbly push through the impossible and seek something more ...
may i ask a bit more specifically why your comment evaluating the abstract concept of goodness and its relation to faith is related to this sentence? i'm still not seeing the connection.
"who failed to live their faith" - ie if they had lived up to their faith would have been good. I'm saying that the practice of "faith" and being "good" are largely unconnected. There are plenty of faithful Christians in prison.
By "good" I mean nice, polite, not murdering people. Generally accepted moral behavior.
if someone agrees on what it means to be good, their definition of the term has been subjectively qualified. muslims agree its good to cover their women, you probably dont, both these statements are true. seems to be a central aspect of religion, agreeing on codified morality. im fairly confident that not killing is a moral purported by christianity, therefore it doesnt seem logical to label murderers as christians - based on their murderous behaviour, murderers do not agree with christianity, regardless as to what they verbally state. would you label buddhists as immoral if an individual decided to call himself buddhist post-massacre?
yikes. this is very out of touch with current trends.
i respect writing a book - ive written three, but if there’s a time when most tech leadership cared LESS about understanding software team psychology, i havent seen it.
truly a sad state of things. i love this topic and plan to read the book but i dont expect most people to care - the only mantra in software rn is to go as fast as possible on shitty features and burn people out.
of course above assessment is about the general state of big tech co’s. some pockets of sanity out there still at smaller companies but not many!
reply