Maybe the one that chants "simply having a wonderful Christmas time" sucks more. They're neck and neck in being awful pieces of music

And I think they know full well they're giving nothing of value to users who are in fact incidental to the whole data-collection apparatus. Their marketing approach is a tissue-thin layer of gee-whiz wonder at new tech coupled with obligatory implementation, a shriveled carrot and an invisible stick

But of course the point is that the AI companies DO in fact want to be the pipe. The whole point is to be the pipe, to be the whole information-plumbing system. They want all the world's data passing through them, available and under their control.

The best analogy I can give for some of these programs is that they're like a pipe, claiming to purify the water that passes through; in fact they purify nothing, passing more or less the same thing out one end as came in the other. I truly see no value in them for the user

Others I've worked with are intended to actually replace text but they are, at best, inferior paraphrases of the originals. You're better of just reading the original because then you'll know if there's important information missing.

Some of the LLM tasks I've seen summarize text so that the reader can determine if they should bother reading the whole thing. These cannot be trusted to properly evaluate the contents because they have no grasp of human meaning and context, so they consistently prioritize the wrong things

So if you want a good piece of text as an output, you generally have to come up with a prompt that is pretty much as specific and detailed as the output you want. So many times, I've looked at prompts, seen the output, and just thought that using the prompt would have been far, far better

At least the cigarettes smell like the 90s

Puzzling how people are out here smoking blueberry muffins and shit

Finally captured Milky's door technique in which he uses his head as a wedge to force access