[deleted]

More verbose does not imply that is is more clear, it is often rambling and not even accurate.

Probably costs .1% more.

It helps mislead the public into thinking AI is something different than it actually is.

Because their pee isn’t carbonated?

AIO

Gordon Gekko from Wallstreet

The bubble already sucks and it popping will suck differently.

Have any of their super models lived up to the hype?

Of course this one won’t either.

They could use reliable sources to approach 100% instead of jamming literally everything in. For example, limiting the training data to peer reviewed papers would not be exactly 100% but it would be a lot closer than including all of reddit.

I missed that one, but saw the foot rest.

On the other side is an assumption that a publisher can just set significantly sifferent prices in different store fronts and are entitled to being on those store fronts. That isn’t the case either, brick and mortar stores have always had the option to not carry an item when the sale price is significantly different than other store fronts.

The 30% thing is also incredibly misrepresented. Regular and online stores always have a significant markup for the vast majority of their stock, with a few high profile items as exceptions to that rule.

Steam is choosing not to distribute the game at a significantly higher price than elsewhere if the publisher is choosing that pricing structure. The publisher can either choose to distribute on steam with a comparable (not identical) price on steam or not distribute on steam.

Steam isn’t making the publisher do anything on other storefronts and as you pointed out what Ubi was doing was anticompetitive.

Lowering the price on steam would have been a remedy and would have benefitted players, just like all of the sales on steam that it actively promotes where the publisher drops the price.

This is about Ubi trying to be anticompetitive in pricing on their store and steam choosing to not go along with it. Steam consistently lowers the prices of games overall and always has.

Steam was saying that if they want to sell it cheaper elsewhere then they should also sell it cheaper on steam. Steam threatened to delist the game if the prices weren’t consistent because it was comparatively overpriced by a significant amount.

They did not say the publisher needed to raise the price elsewhere, just that it needed to be consistent.

If they used care and dedication they could make the fancy autocomplete return factual information now.

I play with a friend who has played for decades while I have barely played for a year. The fun is that like regular golf where most of the distance is a drive amd walking, and the putting is the only real pressure part. I trimmed down to three discs because I’m still not very consconsistent.

But we play for the exercise so it definitely falls in the dull umbrella. There is also a league where they do practice a lot and make some amazing shots where the exact disc does matter.

Pretty sure they picked the wrong tech to try and lock people into. It isn’t hardware and doesn’t have some kind of proprietary interface that takes time to get used to when switching. Some models might be better than others at specific things, but not enough to justify the prices they are going to charge for output you have to review and fix.

This is literally the easiest thing to jump ship from.

Not only is the tech itself trash for what it is being used for, the marketing promotes using it to bypass all of the steps that make a normal process work.

Vomit out some AI slop and handing it out without any kind of review process bypasses the steps where someone would normally catch human errors or misunderstandings. But since AI is promoted as outputting the final result instantly people aren’t looking at the details and what is why there is so much slop.

Because the anti human tech extremists own the media.

They’re the same picture.