• petersr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    If I understand correctly, if we actually said “this model is great, let’s put a pin in it”, then it could be turned into a dedicated chip that would be much more efficient and perhaps even something that could get embedded in consumer hardware - but then you are just stuck with that model instead of “the next shiny new model” that they keep making.

    • Mearcfara@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      20 hours ago

      This sent me for a loop.

      I don’t mind older stuff- my car is from the late '10s, and was a few years old when I got it, but blew my mind compared to my last car from the mid '00s. It has a back up camera! And even though my car is now nearing 10 years old, my experience hasn’t changed. I’m still driving on mostly the same roads using the same method. And, when I have to get a new car, I’m sure I’ll marvel at remote start or whatever.

      But what’s a bummer is the idea that someone else can decide that the hardware is no longer adequate- that “you must have the newest experience”. I simply don’t want that. Yes, it’s annoying that my phone has to be plugged in to access carplay, while new cars have it over bluetooth, but I didn’t even know it was that way until I got a rental recently.

      So for AI, i’m okay with some shortcomings, because I can get to know the software and work with it, and if the shortcoming is a show stopper, then I can seek to upgrade or just not do what I was trying to do with my older gen AI.

      But alas, the number must go up so the shareholders can rub their stocks or whatever