Technology
News community around technology, social media platforms, information technology and governmental policy surrounding it.
What doesn't fit here?
The core of the story has to be technology focused.
- If article mentions "AI" in a sentence and then talks about business economics that doesn't make it tech news.
- Gaming is too many layers removed from technology. There are many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Transporation is too many layers removed from technology. EVs while use many cool technologies have many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Entertainment is too many layers removed from technology. While sometimes it can fit here, business or cultural aspects of it are a better fit for dedicated communities.
- Cybersecurity. While it heavily focuses on technology, most of the time it's too technical for most people who are not already invested in it. Should be posted in a dedicated communities unless it has broader connection to other tech areas.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title. If you don't like the title of article, look for an alternative source instead of editorializing it.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title. Opinion articles refer to articles that their publisher doesn't explictly endorse.
Country prefix
Country prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) if the news is from a local publisher who doesn't clearly mention the country.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
view the rest of the comments
So much money burned in the name of efficiency and wise investment of resources for absolutely fucking nothing but an eventual pathetic, quiet retreat from pushing a future that has already consumed incomprehensible amounts of money with even less to show for it than the VR bubble (though VR is actually cool and an actual technology that works so bad comparison).
Tell me again how capitalism is so efficient and is effective at lucidly designing tools and services for society that people desire and need... I won't listen to a word you say as I keep using my open source tools.
VR is cool. Meta's vision for VR was obviously dumb as hell and never going to work.
Imagine if all that money, time, resources and trust had been put in the control of actual game developers?
I think VR is a reasonable analogy.
The tech works. It's just super niche applications. It would have been incredibly stupid for a business to presume that it'll be huuuuge market based on hype, and invest billions in say, a virtual reality universe.. Presuming they'll recoup costs once the public all have their own VR gear due to its obvious 'really cool tech' factor.
AI is the same. Yeah, the tech works.. In a less precise, less predictable, but still sometimes useful way. Again, very niche applications. Will fucking everyone on earth want to spend $5/month to use it? I really doubt it and I have no idea why they would presume that, except because such presumptions when stated to their shareholders make line go up.
We'll see who ends up writing off their own personal Metaverse-like AI pipedream disasters, when the finally figure out the money's just not coming - but the writeoffs will be 100 times larger, and I think some big name businesses might not be able to survive it.
There is no reason a major percentage of people couldn't one day find usefulness or enjoyment out of VR, the devices are simply an order of magnitude too expensive right now and inherently it isn't an experience you can share easily but it is a genuinely new experience for people and that is indisputable.
AI on the otherhand is a cancerous process of stealing (legally or not) well curated large datasets, throwing them into a woodchipper, creating an extremely lossy compression of all that data that is fed to people through a device that constantly hallucinates and then using the sometimes decent output of all of that to rationalize austerity for the humans and institutions that created the datasets and true value in the first place.
VR is an exciting new technology with tenuous and awkward beginnings, AI is a process of self immolation of knowledge and the practices and values that safeguard and maintain it for the public benefit, it is not just unsustainable, it is a process of extraction done by the ruling class to diminish and enclose public resources that leaves a diminished wasteland of byproducts in its wake.....like mountaintop removal but applied to knowledge and learning itself.
Yep, but you start with the same argument. VR tech 'may some day' be cheap and accessible enough to be truly useful widely.
Exact same case with AI. Its pretty shit now, but may evolve into more useful products one day much later when tech evolves.
Injecting obscene amounts of capital on either path is stupid because the end goal is unlikely to be close and the market isn't proven.
A lot of people forget that VR headsets and gear have existed in evolving forms for decades, then big tech got hold of it and went bananas with it circa 2015 spending enormous amounts of money. Myself and anyone my age went 'um this is still the same old tech - it's very expensive, it gives you a headache, and it's cool but it's not incredible. This will die in a few years when nobody buys it'. And so it did.
Big tech is the problem in both cases - they need to always have a new shiny bauble to dangle at investors and say 'this is the future and it will make us all trillionaires!'.
Fully in agreement that the way they've implemented LLMs is far more cancerous and illegal than anything that happened with VR, but there are still valid parallels.
VR is an actual technology, AI is just a weapon the ruling class is using to encode a set of cultural norms that further dehumanize workers.
I'm confused. Who said capitalism was efficient?
Everybody who defends the idea that capitalism is the natural and right order of things and cannot be improved upon with an alternate more socialist arrangement of societal resources?
Ok. And who had said this?
Western media pilled folks
Such as? Jesus, why is a simple question so difficult to answer?
You can use google, im not gonna ask everyone on earth i've talked to for their names to add to a list.
In relation to this post, smartass.