‘Nothing is changing’ — Reddit is denying a report from The Washington Post that it might force users to log in to see content if it can’t reach deals with AI companies::Reddit initially denied a report from The Washington Post that it might force users to log in to see content. However, the Post says it may still block search crawlers, and Reddit didn’t deny to The Verge that it may do so.

  • Pika@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    1 year ago

    people talk about how big AI is but, It’ll crash like everything else as enshittification hits. I tried to use Bing AI the other day for the first time in a few months, it didn’t even let me do more then a handful of entries before locking me out saying I used too many queries in 24h. How is that supposed to be helpful to a consumer as a valid feature of you lock it down.

    • Sparking@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, hasn’t anyone else noticed that there hasn’t been a single profitable product to come out of it? Even copilot is biting the dust already as they try to reduce computing costs. I also haven’t heard of a single person actually paying for chatgpt access either…

        • Sparking@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, but it is not profitable for it to run like this. I would speculate that payed users are the vast minority.

      • zecg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I paid 20 bucks plus VAT last week for a month of access to try the new dalle in chatgpt, it has just dropped.

      • stockRot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I work in healthcare tech and can guarantee there are exciting things coming down the pipeline in that domain

        • Sparking@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Lol. I will believe it when I see it. I don’t think LLMs especially will do that much good in Healthcare, and I would be particulary wary of them diagnosing patients. Aside from some very limited signal analysis for telehealth, I am very wary on the applications of “new” AI on healthcare. I believe it will be a disaster.

            • Sparking@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              8f your in enterprise software, this stuff is pretty malleable. You are regularly asked to give pitches and lectures on medical projects, for sales reasons. You would be surprised - most people that work on this stuff have no idea the fist thing about medicine.

              My Mom’s a doctor, so I can ask her to have a bit of insight about this stuff. The challenges facing healthcare don’t have that much to do with technology, at least in the US.

          • stockRot@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            We’re largely still working with LLMs at the moment – Using them to immediately pull in relevant clinical information from previous encounters when a doctor sees a patient. Or using generative AI to edit doctors’ messages to patients be more empathetic and… human (our pilot organizations have really loved this one so far). Using procedure codes on claims to guess if certain diagnoses were missed and to make more robust health risk profiles for populations as a whole – these are a bit more NLP/data mining.

      • bamboo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I and many of my coworkers pay for ChatGPT. It’s super useful at work and can be used to save a considerable amount of time.

        • Sparking@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m in all the business meetings. “Use Chatham to save time generating analysis” or something like that. I think it has been proven that merely using it as a tool to generate content isn’t profitable- at some level even your paid subscription is subsidized by VC money. The real test is if it provides “valuable” content. But then why does your employer even need you to make the prompts? Don’t worry, I believe LLMs are fundamentally incapable of this and that your job is safe.

    • glockenspiel@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Those companies learned their lesson from search engines. They gave it away for free for far too long and with too few strings attached. It became impossible to realistically gate features and charge for them.

      But chatbots, on the other hand, just need a little big money razzle dazzle and, boom, now it is AI and people are conditioned to accept any limits thrown at them.

    • KinglyWeevil@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I get why some limits are necessary, a company doesn’t want a Microsoft Tae repeat…but after Chat GPT was made available to the public, the rapid addition of a whole range of guardrails made it nearly immediately unusable.

      You ask it about anything which is controversial in the slightest regard and it shuts down, which for me at least, removes any interest in using it.