paxfuturus

paxfuturus t1_j1d9r2s wrote

Reply to comment by bigkoi in Google's management has reportedly issued a 'code red' amid the rising popularity of the ChatGPT AI by SnoozeDoggyDog

The issue of racism is overstated for OpenAI and understated for Google. Those are absolutely problems that have to be considered, but Google has been doing that for decades and they're still dealing with people getting radicalized on YouTube. If anything its less likely on OpenAI because it's conversationally intuitive.

The big difference is that OpenAI is giving actual AI access to users in a much more tangible way, and also in a way that provides superior a search experience to Google for tons of applications. That's why Google is freaking out, they've been focused on profiteering in search and not service and it really shows. As innovative as Google likes to portray themselves as being, they are an old established player and a monopoly which is why we haven't seen this kind of innovation sooner even though it's been possible for quite some time. Monopolies stifle innovation and competition, that's why we have antitrust laws.

On a philosophical note, OpenAI's focus on research and development of advanced AI technologies sets it apart from Google, which primarily uses AI for financially expedient applications. Google is not a social enterprise. And even though OpenAI isn't non-profit anymore, they are profit capped. All that allows OpenAI to push the boundaries of what is possible with artificial intelligence and contribute to the field in a meaningful way. Being a newer company also allows for greater flexibility and agility in adapting to new developments and technologies in the field.

I use Google Pixel by the way, and have used every Google phone and I have a Chromebook tablet, Nest ecosystem etc.. It's not that I don't appreciate their products.

2

paxfuturus t1_j1d5zwn wrote

Reply to comment by bigkoi in Google's management has reportedly issued a 'code red' amid the rising popularity of the ChatGPT AI by SnoozeDoggyDog

While it is true that traditional search engines can provide quick and simple answers to cooking queries, ChatGTP offers much more advanced capabilities. For example, ChatGTP can understand and respond to more complex and nuanced requests, such as asking for recipe variations or substitutions. It can also engage in more in-depth conversations, providing detailed explanations and recommendations based on user preferences and dietary restrictions. Additionally, ChatGTP can learn and adapt over time, becoming more efficient and personalized in its responses. These features make ChatGTP a superior choice for those seeking more than just basic recipe information.

P.s. that was AI generated by ChatGTP as a custom response to your criticism. One thing I'll note though is that it is also way better at delivering recipes than Google is. No offense.

2

paxfuturus t1_j17oz6z wrote

Reply to comment by lordredapple in Microsoft-Activision deal: Gamers sue to stop merger by marketrent

TL;DR Apple abuses it's market dominance, harming consumers, suppressing innovative competition, etc

I'm sure you're familiar with some examples like iMessage login, exorbitant app store profiteering, intercompany hiring arrangements with other FAANG company so that people can't quit, etc.*

One important thing to note is there are several forms of monopolization, a single player monopoly, duopoly, oligopoly, etc. Certain industries are constrained by extrinsic limitations like aviation and infrastructure where there's not a lot of room for competitors. That's where increased regulation becomes more essential. But that is not the case with consumer electronics. It's the behavior that's a problem, when a company gets to the point where it controls market, suppressing innovation and abusing market forces that are supposed to keep corporations in check, that's when it's a problem. Apple is in that place and of course a handful of other technology companies.

Monopolies are bad because they have the ability to raise prices and reduce output, leading to a lack of competition and potentially harmful effects on consumers. Additionally, monopolies can often abuse their market power to stifle innovation and harm smaller competitors, leading to a less dynamic and efficient market overall.

Don't let Apple make you think that it is creating amazing new technology that is pushing consumer electronics forward. That is literally nothing but marketing. Like when Steve Jobs try to pretend he invented the capacitive touch screen and had "trademarked the hell out of it". There's almost no chance that we wouldn't be further along if it wasn't for Apple and it's monopolistic behavior. Apple has shut down so many innovative new companies, bought them out, or leveraged market dominance to suppress threats.

Monopolies are bad.

As far as Apple is concerned, there are many more but here are five:

  1. Exclusive dealing: Apple has been accused of requiring app developers to only distribute their apps through the App Store, effectively preventing them from using competing app marketplaces. This can limit competition and reduce consumer choice.

  2. Self-preferencing: Apple has also been accused of promoting its own apps and services over those of its competitors on its platforms. For example, Apple's App Store has been criticized for featuring its own apps more prominently than competing apps, and for making it more difficult for users to find and access alternative apps.

  3. Leveraging market power: Apple's dominance in certain markets, such as the smartphone and tablet markets, has allowed it to use its market power to negotiate favorable terms with app developers and other partners. This can make it difficult for competitors to enter or succeed in these markets.

  4. Acquiring potential competitors: Apple has a history of acquiring smaller companies that could potentially pose a threat to its business. This can reduce competition in a market and limit innovation.

  5. Restricting access to APIs: Apple has been accused of restricting access to its APIs (application programming interfaces) to certain developers, while allowing others to access them more easily. This can make it difficult for developers of competing products to build compatible products, which can limit competition in the market.

1