It has already been renamed to Microsoft365.

And the whole set of problems only exist because there are too many cars.

I honestly thought that maybe Lemmy wouldn’t have karma farmers, since there is no global points tracker. But here we are, with an exact copy-paste of an old post being presented as though it is a authentic sharing of personal thoughts.

Why do this?

Counterpoint: I haven’t noticed that being a trend until this thread.

Realistic AI generated faces have been available for longer than realistic AI generated conversation ability.

yeah, it’s pretty common for AI answers to feel very accurate and useful on topics the user doesn’t know much about, but highly error-prone and unreliable on topics the user is an expert in. … … …

It means death. -1 life.

Probably, but the stink will linger for quite a long time.

There’s a burger place near my house that I use to go to almost every week. But then the quality started going down, and I stopped going there. That was two years ago. Maybe they fixed the problems, but I’m not going to know - because I no longer go there. Snap is like that.

It’s crazy how you missed that point yet harp about intelligence.

I’m not sure why you said that. The person you are responding didn’t ‘miss that point’. They were themselves pointing out that other people have missed it. You are both criticising people for missing the same point.

wtf

I’d rather download a bear than download a strange man, that’s for sure.

No. Different comics, different artists, different themes. - But some similarity in visual style.

:)

Yeah, maybe “trash” is a bit harsh. But it definitely isn’t on the same level as 2; and it has a lot of problems. Even the turning off power thing was a bit weird. I’m certain the top-side could easily outlast the under-city in that kind of standoff. I’m not really sure why they needed the power back so urgently. There didn’t seem to be a lot of critical infrastructure, and most people living there didn’t have any tech that could use the power anyway.

Master was said to be really smart and knowledgeable and important, but I don’t recall seeing him demonstrating that at any point. He seemed to just command other people to fix stuff and do stuff. And even when he lost that command, he was still never shown actually doing anything or sharing knowledge. So it was a bit of a mystery to me why the others thought he was important.

… And why was he in the thunderdome cage? “Two men enter, one man leaves” was a big deal; and the guards definitely did not want to open the gates. But then suddenly, inexplicably, Master is just standing right next to them in the cage. Like, wtf is he doing in there? – Ok… I’ll shut up. I do take back saying it was ‘trash’, but I definitely don’t think its a good movie.

The full list: https://code.gouv.fr/sill/list

Hold on. That page does not list VLC or KeePass. Is there more info about this other than the list? Or is the info in the title of this post incorrect?

[edit]

I see now. The page does not list VLC or KeePass, but those two both do come up if you put them into the search box. The software listed on the page is a very long list, but it is apparently on the ‘most popular’ stuff - not the entire list. (Although it is strange to see a heap of niche stuff, and stuff I’ve never heard of on the ‘most popular’ list while VLC doesn’t make the cut.)

I’m not sure this list is a very strong endorsement by the French Government. It seems to just be listing free software options, and then asking other people to sign up to say which ones they use.

It does kind of feel like the UN could use a refresh. In particular, the veto powers given to certain countries feels bad. There may be good reasons for that system, but the system is not good - and the details of the reasons have definitely shifted over time such that the choice of countries with veto power is now highly questionable.

My point was that “lose money on every prompt” would be true in a technical sense regardless of how much people were paying for a subscription. The subscription money is money in, and the cost of calculations is money out. It’s still money out regardless of what is coming in.

As for whether the business is profitable or not, it’s not so easy to tell unless you’re an insider. Companies like this basically never make a ‘profit’ on paper, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t enriching themselves. They are counting their own pay as part of the costs, and they set their pay to whatever they like. They are also counting various research and expansion efforts as part of the cost. So yeah, they might not have any excess money to pay dividends to shareholders, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t profitable.

I find the dynamics of lichess.org vs chess.com very interesting.

They are similar in terms of features. Both have decent interfaces, puzzles, matchmaking, live viewing boards and broadcasts for tournaments, training programs, etc. But chess.com has ads, and features locked behind subscription paywalls where lichess.org does not. (Everything is free on lichess, except for the little logo next to a user’s name to say they have supported the site with donations.)

But on the other hand, chess.com seems to have a higher number pro players; and probably a larger number of players overall.

I think its very interesting to think about why that is the case. Why would more people choose the version that is more expensive, but does not have more features?

I’ve thought of a few reasons, but I think probably the biggest effect is that chess.com has more money to splash around (because it sells ads, and asks for user subscriptions), and it uses big chunk of this money to advertise itself. eg. by sponsoring players and streamers, offering larger prizes for its own tournaments; etc.

And although I definitely think lichess is better, since it is generously supplying a high-quality product without trying to self-enrich, I do sometimes think maybe what chess.com is doing is ok too: in the sense that it is not only self-enriching, but also supporting the sport itself a bit by paying money to players, events, and commentators. Lichess does this too - but less of it, because they have less money.

(Note that chess.com also does some really crappy stuff, such as censoring any mention of lichess in the chat of their twitch broadcasts. That definitely does not help support the sport.)

People don’t usually interact with a hammer by talking to it. They interact by holding it, placing it, hammering with it. Respect for a hammer (or similar tool) would be based around those kinds of actions.

Whereas people do interact with a chatbot by talking to it. So then respect for a chatbot would be built around what is said.

People can show respect for a hammer, a house, a dinner prepared by their spouse, their spouse, a chatbot, etc… but respect for each of those things will look a bit different.

Well sure, answering the queries continues to cost the company money regardless of what subscription the user has. The company would definitely make more money if the users paid for subscription and then made zero queries.

I’d try this, but I don’t know what address to email them at. All of the support / contact instructions are a labyrinth of automated systems, with the fallback option of using the ‘community forum’. Google doesn’t seem to want anyone to contact them for any reason.