To their credit, they thought plagiarism would always benefit them, not the other way around.

/s just in case

No but I might be like that with self hosting stuff.

People care about Spotify, but not their own private Spotify, does not compute!

My issue was them asking what social media I used.

I sometimes said Reddit cause saying nothing sometimes got me perplexed looks.

An aggregator of aggregators?

God I love the fediverse

It’s a reaction to thinking China has better AI, not thinking AI has less value.

So I guess there is a use case for AI,

It’s almost like out of a movie, the technology can only be used to benefit evil.

And then people will complain about that saying it’s almost all hype and no substance.

Then that one tech bro will keep insisting that lemmy is being unfair to AI and there are so many good use cases.

No one is denying the 10% use cases, we just don’t think it’s special or needs extra attention since those use cases already had other possible algorithmic solutions.

Tech bros need to realize, even if there are some use cases for AI, there has not been any revolution, stop trying to make it happen and enjoy your new slightly better tool in silence.

I read this comment chain and no? They are giving you actual criticism about the fundamental behaviour of the technology.

The person basically explained the broken telephone game and how “summarizing” will always have data loss by definition, and you just responded with:

In this case it actually summarized my post(I guess you could make the case that my post is an opinion that’s shared by many people–so forer-y in that sense)

Just because you couldn’t notice the data loss doesn’t mean the principle isn’t true.

Your basically saying translating something from English to Spanish and then back to English again is flawless cause it worked for some words for you.