Counterpoint: Take a look at consumer cellular. I would say it’s drastically cheaper than verizon, at&t, or t-mobile, but the customer support is better than all 3.
Ting also has (had?) excellent customer service. Call the 800 number and the first thing you hear is “hello” from an actual human who has the ability to help you. They also didn’t charge a lot, which makes me think great customer service is a choice.
It seems like if ChatGPT had literally any other way to turn a profit, they would have done it before resorting to this. Kind of fees like this is their last ditch effort to show investors that they can somehow become profitable.
Same. If chatgpt actually could do what they claim, would they be wanking (heh) around with erotica and job boards, or would they be selling $5k/mo subscriptions that replace junior employees? The answer is obvious.
Is the idea that hackers can review the source for vulnerabilities?
I would imagine any internet-facing application would not have any issues with a source code "leak" like this, as all inter-app communication is based on short-lived credentials.
> Nobody wants a computer. They want what it does.
This is exactly why we have AI assistants in the first place.
The typical person wants the damn phone / computer / tablet out of their life, they just want to say "Siri, make my dentist appointment for 9:30 Monday morning" or "Copilot, find all the pictures of my dad and put them together in a collage for his birthday".
The biggest problem with AI assistants and this thought process in general is that they do not work.
As the article states, if the AI assistants actually did things we wanted, these companies wouldn't need to shove them down our throats so much. We would just... use them.
Agree on it being AI, but what really screamed "AI slop" to me was the emojis. I don't know any tech bloggers who use emojis, but everything that ChatGPT or Gemini generates always has too many emojis.
