The presentation used the example, “Imagine ChatGPT, but it already knows everything about your life.”
I’m impressed someone thought of that, wrote a presentation, rehearsed it, then presented it and at no point thought that it sounds creepy and invasive.
It sounds like exactly what I would want, if it were open source, audited, and under my direct control.
It sound like exactly what i have been saying is the future of human growth.
Ai companions that are like a butler, best friend, therapist, mailperson, accountant, lawyer all in one.
Your ai talks to their ai, before you ever met they each return a baseline of info, conversational opener and suggestions for meeting at a date/location
And absolutely yes on the open source under my direct control cause holy shit end of the world if it is not.
not even family member know everything about life
is private
Ha ha, no.
Google has announced the closure of Project Ellmann, ending minutes of speculations
You’re just being cute, right?
Oh dont worry, we already have the data. This is just a formal announcement. Your new bot will arrive in 5 days.
The bot has already existed in a different form for years. Instead of you talking to it they asked it which ads are most effective to show you specifically.
Google is not just getting into ML. They’ve been at the bleeding edge for decades.
Google can’t even keep a podcast service going. I certainly wouldn’t trust them with a little buddy that I care about.
Jokes on us tho. Google is going ahead with this, it’s just never going to made available for public use. It’s only to use for figuring out exactly what we’ll buy.
Why have a bot just figure out what consumers want when it you can also have it do direct marketing?
This announcement wasn’t for consumers, but advertisers.
Nope.
Yeah, I’d rather not, piss off.
I propose that we do not.
I’ve literally dreamed of having such a boy since the late 90s. But decades of following the tech industry since have shown me how I might not want that after all…
You probably meant bot (and not boy) but it sure made a funny mental image. I’m imagining a little robo Pinocchio type boy
The right to NONassociation should always outrank the right to association.
Molesters may claim the right to closely-associate, but the right-to-be-not-molested should outrank their association-right.
Nonassociation needs to be a fundamental right.
In multiple contexts.
Abusees who want no-contact to have teeth,
molester-survivors,
etc.
Including identity-molestation/theft, and other abuses of one’s personal information.
_ /\ _
No thanks.
paaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaass
A chatbot that needs to mind its own damn business, I say.
Bring it on, I’ll make it hate me
deleted by creator
