I think scam is perhaps not quite right. I see AI as the evolution beyond social media algorithms. Now it will feel even more human resulting in the manipulation being even more subtle and effective over time. Being more human like may also help people feel like sharing more information with it. Some may even think it is their friend. I think there is a lot more psychology in play with AI whereas Web3 mostly plays on ones greed and facilitates wash trading and faux investments into unregistered unlicensed securities. So for AI I believe a better description could be manipulation framework.
Comparing web3 scams to this new wave of AI is unironically ignorant and delusional.
For one small example I literally get daily value from Copilot and happily pay for it, and there is much more beyond this. I've never once gotten meaningful value from web3.
These people migrated to AI because their goal is to get rich quick. Whether or not it's a scam is orthogonal. It's the same people got excited about metaverse, producing online courses, and weed startups. If they aren't in tech they're doing supplements and drop shipping.
Every time in the last 5 years that I drive by Evernote Building on the 101 - I was shocked it was still in business. With Apple Notes chipping away at its core, and stiff competition from Notion - how long could it survive?
With exception to the term experts, which I imagine is a term you've applied, I don't think there's anything inherently bad with people changing their focus to the latest tech.
Could this perhaps be a you issue? How do you feel when you think about people changing from microservice architecture to blockchain to crypto and now to language models?
IMO being a good technologist entails being skeptical of technologies. Someone has to and should be blindly optimistic, and some people’s jobs borderline depend on it (like VCs) because the risk-reward is asymmetric for them. Overall though, we need to maintain a culture of skepticism around technology — much like scientists do around science. That’s especially true when discussing tech that either: discredits the industry in the eyes of the non-tech public; enables widespread fraud against vulnerable people; or could have significant negative impacts on “the commons” like spam, pollution, reckless political or economic disruption, etc.
Depends if people are appointing themselves as experts or if people are claiming people are experts for changing their interests. Right now, its impossible to know which. I've seen people getting excited about LLMs and their potential and there's nothing wrong with that.
It is a big release, and the number of new stdlib packages (4) is relatively high for a Go release. That said, apart from the addition of some minor builtins (min, max, clear), the language isn't changing. That happened back in 1.18 with the introduction of generics.
Oh, no no. We'll be keeping Microsoft, Google, and Meta in power. They'll be just fine. They won't have to worry about small, nimble startups coming for their lunch.
AI makes a lot of product easy to deliver, and startups can tool it in ways to go after entirely new product areas and domains. Big tech disassembly, a la Craigslist. Quickly. We can't have that until big tech gets a good choke hold via regulatory moat.
Eh, China will be fine with our laws for AI for internal usage, they don't want internal destabilization either. If your AI happens to become bothersome to Xi or drop out too many Pooh flavored meme's then expect China to frown on it.
Now for AI's used against other countries then China will be all about that, as long as they know their place.
Florida has been both completely submerged and prior to the ice age had much much more coast line. If you dig anywhere in Florida you can find evidence of it being the sea floor.
> with the result being that the oceans were about 400 feet (122 meters) lower than today. During the last global "warm spell," about 125,000 years ago, the seas were about 18 feet (5.5. meters) higher [1]
Most popular databases have change data capture as a feature. They read backups of the transaction log and extract events they care about (dml operations against subscribed tables) and then store the results into shadow tables. They tend to be relatively low overhead compared with many hand-rolled solutions.
One other benefit is they capture all the changes to the underlying data, not just the net changes.
It’s important to realize though that CDC records change information but isn’t a mechanism to move it anywhere. You would still have to devise a means to move the data to another system.
Debezium is a data movement tool that uses CDC for the underlying tracking.
