Skip to content

Google is going ‘all in’ on AI. It’s part of a troubling trend in big tech

Technology
119 72 244
  • Nothing I can do to resist?

    Microsoft is shoving this copilot in all its products? Alright, Linux and open source it is.

    Google is bugging with its spyware? Well, I only use a Pixel phone, and ironically, its the best phone to put GrapheneOS on it.

    Gmail? I don't remember when I opened mine the last time...

    All what's really remaining right now is a good YouTube alternative.

    Nothing I can do to resist?

    I admire your optimism, but we are pissing in the wind.

    Microsoft is shoving this copilot in all its products? Alright, Linux and open source it is.

    Windows 11 is forcing people to throw away functional computers that Microsoft seems "not secure enough" (it's lacking TMP 2.0)

    This means you can get a great deal on one of these "inscure pc"... but in the long run your pc now and tomorrow will have TPM. As time progresses, the use of TPM/attestation will become more and more entrenched in application, web pages, everything. ... and Linux, with its 4% user base, will be left out in cold.

    Google is bugging with its spyware? Well, I only use a Pixel phone, and ironically, its the best phone to put GrapheneOS on it.

    Currently, many banking apps won't run on Graphene (or any custom firmware) due to attestation.

    Graphene issued calls for help, because Google is restricting public access to the latest android source code (I cannot find the links atm).

    Gmail? I don't remember when I opened mine the last time...

    Today things like "email reputation" make it difficult to host your own mail server, so your stuck paying someone who has a better "reputation".

    My point is: today, you and I can resist with some (minor) success, but our days are numbered.

  • Tech companies don’t really give a damn what customers want anymore.

    Ed Zitron wrote an article about how leadership is business idiots. They don't know the products or users but they make decisions and get paid. Long, like everything he writes, but interesting

    Our economy is run by people that don't participate in it and our tech companies are directed by people that don't experience the problems they allege to solve for their customers, as the modern executive is no longer a person with demands or responsibilities beyond their allegiance to shareholder value.

    Can confirm. The more you deal with people who have climbed to the tops of corporate ladders, the more it becomes clear that it's all vibes. It's all people telling stories to other people who tell stories about those stories.

    The peter principle is wrong - in an oversized corporate structure, there is no upper bound for incompetence. You can keep rising for no reason, because after a certain point other people just trust that you know what you're talking about, and the people that know better work around you instead.

    The people beneath you can't trust the people above you enough to explain the situation, the people above you don't really listen to the people beneath you anyway, and so plenty of middle managers just muddle through and constantly make shit up to justify their own existence, while everyone above and below is left in the dark about what's really going on.

    Decisions are constantly made by people without any real connection to the consequences, and it shows. With the everything.

  • I work with ServiceNow for my job and a couple weeks back was the big knowledge 2025 conference in Vegas. The CEO came out for the opening keynote and opened with some like, "ah yea, doesn't it feel good to be an AI company?" and I didn't here a single cheer from the crowd, just polite applause. They have gone all in on AI, have made it completely unaffordable, and have just been shoehorning it into everything. I hope every one of these companies that that goes big on AI crashes and fails. They've already cut the employees, so the only people affected are the ones making the cash, so fuck em.

    the fuck does service now even need AI for?

    I hate any company I work for that uses ServiceNow. And now it's getting worse??

  • the fuck does service now even need AI for?

    I hate any company I work for that uses ServiceNow. And now it's getting worse??

    “Bad” is SN’s claim to fame. Everybody hates it. Apparently, the worse they make it, the more companies will throw money at them.

  • Nothing I can do to resist?

    I admire your optimism, but we are pissing in the wind.

    Microsoft is shoving this copilot in all its products? Alright, Linux and open source it is.

    Windows 11 is forcing people to throw away functional computers that Microsoft seems "not secure enough" (it's lacking TMP 2.0)

    This means you can get a great deal on one of these "inscure pc"... but in the long run your pc now and tomorrow will have TPM. As time progresses, the use of TPM/attestation will become more and more entrenched in application, web pages, everything. ... and Linux, with its 4% user base, will be left out in cold.

    Google is bugging with its spyware? Well, I only use a Pixel phone, and ironically, its the best phone to put GrapheneOS on it.

    Currently, many banking apps won't run on Graphene (or any custom firmware) due to attestation.

    Graphene issued calls for help, because Google is restricting public access to the latest android source code (I cannot find the links atm).

    Gmail? I don't remember when I opened mine the last time...

    Today things like "email reputation" make it difficult to host your own mail server, so your stuck paying someone who has a better "reputation".

    My point is: today, you and I can resist with some (minor) success, but our days are numbered.

    In regard to Linux users being left out in the cold.. how so? Do you think that distros are going to start enforcing attestation? I doubt that it will be a hard requirement for most, even in the next decade or two. It's an option, yes, but mandatory?

    FWIW, all of my banking apps work just fine with compatibility mode enabled on Graphene. Also, I'm not sure saying it's inevitable is the right way to go, it certainly won't make others care about their privacy and security.

  • “Bad” is SN’s claim to fame. Everybody hates it. Apparently, the worse they make it, the more companies will throw money at them.

    You might be joking but I honestly think that's the case. It's wild to me. I've worked for Fortune 500 companies using SNOW and everybody hated it and regularly voiced complaints and issues and yet the company refused to change. Started doing shit like releasing more training docs on how to use it or doing brown bag lunches on SNOW effectiveness.

    But ultimately none of that mattered, it is just inherently garbage.

  • Google has gotten so fucking dumb. Literally incapable of performing the same function it could 4 months ago.

    How the fuck am I supposed to trust Gemini!?

    I find this current timeline so confusing. Supposedly we're going to have AGI soon, and yet Google's AI keeps telling you to stick glue on pizza. How can both things be true?

  • Google did the same thing with Google Plus they went all in on social and it failed miserably

    It was actually a really good product, way better than Facebook, unfortunately if you have a social media platform that's invite only then it's never going to succeed. I really have no idea why they did it like that.

  • the fuck does service now even need AI for?

    I hate any company I work for that uses ServiceNow. And now it's getting worse??

    It already has script automation and has had for years so I'm not sure what AI is going to bring to the table.

  • I find this current timeline so confusing. Supposedly we're going to have AGI soon, and yet Google's AI keeps telling you to stick glue on pizza. How can both things be true?

    I assume it's big tech that has this weird ai they try to sell while the scientists are using different ai for real useful stuff, like the protein something I heard. Or at least that's what I'd like to believe.

  • You might be joking but I honestly think that's the case. It's wild to me. I've worked for Fortune 500 companies using SNOW and everybody hated it and regularly voiced complaints and issues and yet the company refused to change. Started doing shit like releasing more training docs on how to use it or doing brown bag lunches on SNOW effectiveness.

    But ultimately none of that mattered, it is just inherently garbage.

    Well one of the big problems with it is it's never properly configured. One of the most annoying things that it does is that it generates tasks only when previous tasks are closed, in theory that makes sense but really the result is that you close a task, and then you have to go looking in the ticket queue for the new task it's just generated, so you can close that one too. Total waste of time.

  • the fuck does service now even need AI for?

    I hate any company I work for that uses ServiceNow. And now it's getting worse??

    It actually makes a lot of sense. AI is a good use case for case management. The problem is how much you depend on it without human intervention, but even humans fuck up, especially if they’re following the same rules and processes that the AI tool would. The AI tool just gets through cases faster, so in theory you can sus out root causes sooner.

  • In regard to Linux users being left out in the cold.. how so? Do you think that distros are going to start enforcing attestation? I doubt that it will be a hard requirement for most, even in the next decade or two. It's an option, yes, but mandatory?

    FWIW, all of my banking apps work just fine with compatibility mode enabled on Graphene. Also, I'm not sure saying it's inevitable is the right way to go, it certainly won't make others care about their privacy and security.

    In regard to Linux users being left out in the cold.. how so? Do you think that distros are going to start enforcing attestation? I doubt that it will be a hard requirement for most, even in the next decade or two. It's an option, yes, but mandatory?

    It does not matter if Linux supports attestation or not, because ultimately the application (or website) will determine if it wants to run on Linux. It's up to the company developing it's application or website to determine if they want to support more than windows/Mac.

    Graphene has its own variation of attestation (they cryptographically sign requests with their own key - and not googles), but it requires additional hoops for each application - few companies are willing to do this.

    Attestation is a wet dream for companies. You don't need DRM (as the OS will enforce it) and you can be certain your competitors/hackers cannot reverse engineer/pirate your code or run the application in an emulator. And the implementation effort to support it, is as simple as "make function call and check the response".

    Linux will still exist (especially on the server side) and developers will still use it as a desktop machine. However, (as I implied) non-Linux games will stop working, accessing you banks website from linux will be rejected, emulation will cease - it'll be a corporate paradise... the stocks will go up.

    FWIW, all of my banking apps work just fine with compatibility mode enabled on Graphene.

    Revolut explicitly goes out of their way to not work on Graphene.

    I've complained, they don't care. The bean counters have done their risk calculations and decided that the personal data they collect/mine (and the integrity of that data) is worth more than losing a few graphene users.

    Also, I'm not sure saying it's inevitable is the right way to go, it certainly won't make others care about their privacy and security.

    You do have a valid point: giving up after trying nothing won't help. However, I fear there will need to be "government intervention" to allow hardware and software to be "open for everyone". I'll admit my bias in wonder how well governments (of late) are representing the best interests of the people. But, these topics are complicated for even technically inclined people - let alone politicians. And the strawman argument against intervention is always going to be "in the name of security".

    From my perspective, the writing is on the wall. This apocalyptic future won't happen over night, but it will be a slow boil over the next 10 years (or so).

    If you've got ideas for how to avoid this, I'm all ears.

  • Tech companies don't really give a damn what customers want anymore. They have decided this is the path of the future because it gives them the most control of your data, your purchasing habits and your online behavior. Since they control the back end, the software, the tech stack, the hardware, all of it, they just decided this is how it shall be. And frankly, there's nothing you can do to resist it, aside from just eschewing using a phone at all. and divorcing yourself from all modern technology, which isn't really reasonable for most people. That or legislation, but LOL United States.

    Not sure how far back you’re talking but for a VERY long time they have been and continue to be in the business of what feeds the machine.

    Why do you think we have computers in our possession 24/7? Not because we wanted it, but because they told us we wanted it and it enabled us to be available to feed the machine 24/7. You can work more. You can buy more.

    Social media? Feeds the machine.

    Television? Feeds the machine.

    Cars? Feeds the machine.

    Phones. Telegraphs. Fucking lightbulbs.

    All used to feed the machine.

  • I find this current timeline so confusing. Supposedly we're going to have AGI soon, and yet Google's AI keeps telling you to stick glue on pizza. How can both things be true?

    It's the same reason why they removed the headphone jacks from phones. They don't want to give you a better product, they want you to force youbto use a product, even if it's worse in all aspects

  • I find this current timeline so confusing. Supposedly we're going to have AGI soon, and yet Google's AI keeps telling you to stick glue on pizza. How can both things be true?

    Google just released a video generator that is a ball hair away from perfection. The hallucination rate from their latest models is <1% and dropping you just see cherry picked screenshots.

  • Apple still lets you disable their AI which I’m grateful for.

    DuckDuckGo has made A.I. results optional, which is a good move.

    Companies that are making it fixed can go swimming in lava for all I care (looking at you Google).

  • Google just released a video generator that is a ball hair away from perfection. The hallucination rate from their latest models is <1% and dropping you just see cherry picked screenshots.

    I don't think image generators are really in the same category though. They'll have their applications but they're not going to be a fundamental change to society the way AGI will be.

  • I assume it's big tech that has this weird ai they try to sell while the scientists are using different ai for real useful stuff, like the protein something I heard. Or at least that's what I'd like to believe.

    A whole lot of useful stuff that wasn't publicly labelled AI got relabeled to take advantage of funding opportunities. That doesn't mean it is related to generative AI like LLMs and image generators though.

  • I don't think image generators are really in the same category though. They'll have their applications but they're not going to be a fundamental change to society the way AGI will be.

    It’s part of AGI and will be a massive shift. They are to video what punk was to music.

  • 115 Stimmen
    22 Beiträge
    102 Aufrufe
    omegalemmy@discuss.onlineO
    American individualism is when you believe everyone is as bad as you or worse Self-fulfilling prophecy when they never want to cooperate in fear of being ripped off
  • Misogyny and Violent Extremism: Can Big Tech Fix the Glitch?

    Technology technology
    18
    1
    20 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    90 Aufrufe
    G
    It is interesting that you are not answering my point... Good work
  • Mudita Kompakt

    Technology technology
    17
    1
    62 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    86 Aufrufe
    anunusualrelic@lemmy.worldA
    There you go then. It's 80 €.
  • 1k Stimmen
    95 Beiträge
    125 Aufrufe
    G
    Obviously the law must be simple enough to follow so that for Jim’s furniture shop is not a problem nor a too high cost to respect it, but it must be clear that if you break it you can cease to exist as company. I think this may be the root of our disagreement, I do not believe that there is any law making body today that is capable of an elegantly simple law. I could be too naive, but I think it is possible. We also definitely have a difference on opinion when it comes to the severity of the infraction, in my mind, while privacy is important, it should not have the same level of punishments associated with it when compared to something on the level of poisoning water ways; I think that a privacy law should hurt but be able to be learned from while in the poison case it should result in the bankruptcy of a company. The severity is directly proportional to the number of people affected. If you violate the privacy of 200 million people is the same that you poison the water of 10 people. And while with the poisoning scenario it could be better to jail the responsible people (for a very, very long time) and let the company survive to clean the water, once your privacy is violated there is no way back, a company could not fix it. The issue we find ourselves with today is that the aggregate of all privacy breaches makes it harmful to the people, but with a sizeable enough fine, I find it hard to believe that there would be major or lasting damage. So how much money your privacy it's worth ? 6 For this reason I don’t think it is wise to write laws that will bankrupt a company off of one infraction which was not directly or indirectly harmful to the physical well being of the people: and I am using indirectly a little bit more strict than I would like to since as I said before, the aggregate of all the information is harmful. The point is that the goal is not to bankrupt companies but to have them behave right. The penalty associated to every law IS the tool that make you respect the law. And it must be so high that you don't want to break the law. I would have to look into the laws in question, but on a surface level I think that any company should be subjected to the same baseline privacy laws, so if there isn’t anything screwy within the law that apple, Google, and Facebook are ignoring, I think it should apply to them. Trust me on this one, direct experience payment processors have a lot more rules to follow to be able to work. I do not want jail time for the CEO by default but he need to know that he will pay personally if the company break the law, it is the only way to make him run the company being sure that it follow the laws. For some reason I don’t have my usual cynicism when it comes to this issue. I think that the magnitude of loses that vested interests have in these companies would make it so that companies would police themselves for fear of losing profits. That being said I wouldn’t be opposed to some form of personal accountability on corporate leadership, but I fear that they will just end up finding a way to create a scapegoat everytime. It is not cynicism. I simply think that a huge fine to a single person (the CEO for example) is useless since it too easy to avoid and if it really huge realistically it would be never paid anyway so nothing usefull since the net worth of this kind of people is only on the paper. So if you slap a 100 billion file to Musk he will never pay because he has not the money to pay even if technically he is worth way more than that. Jail time instead is something that even Musk can experience. In general I like laws that are as objective as possible, I think that a privacy law should be written so that it is very objectively overbearing, but that has a smaller fine associated with it. This way the law is very clear on right and wrong, while also giving the businesses time and incentive to change their practices without having to sink large amount of expenses into lawyers to review every minute detail, which is the logical conclusion of the one infraction bankrupt system that you seem to be supporting. Then you write a law that explicitally state what you can do and what is not allowed is forbidden by default.
  • 191 Stimmen
    26 Beiträge
    131 Aufrufe
    A
    I wish everyone could read your comment right now. Spot on
  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • There's no chance he signs it but I still hope he does

    Technology technology
    15
    1
    36 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    74 Aufrufe
    E
    And they've been doing it more blatantly and for longer than most tech companies.
  • The Internet of Consent

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    11 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet