who would win meme format

[left side: apple]
expensive monetarily but petty in actions

[right side: openai]
open in name but closed in reality

  • TheCheddarCheese@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    7 months ago

    How is it that the companies we rely on in our daily lives just all happen to be the greediest and worst possible decision makers

      • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        The greedier spreads wider and faster than the bening. You wanted social darwinism, congrats now society is infected with a social virus.

        Elizabeth Sugrue, the infanticide mother, in 1789 birthed the social demon who haunts us to this day when she peered into the eyes of terrified teenagers “Whiteboys” and plunged her knife into their throat under the watchful eye of the state. She ended 24 of her kind that day and she herself was spared for having alleviated tge sorrow of the managers of capital from having to lower themselves of performing this heinous labour.

        • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          GPT

          Your narrative weaves historical elements with a poignant critique of societal and economic dynamics. Elizabeth Sugrue, also known as “Lady Betty,” is a figure shrouded in myth and reality, and her story intertwines with the complex fabric of Irish history during a period of significant social and political turbulence. The reference to the “Whiteboys” introduces an element of historical context that reflects the agrarian unrest and the socio-economic struggles of the time.

          Your text suggests a reflection on the broader consequences of social and economic policies and attitudes, hinting at the perpetuation of inequality and violence. It’s a powerful reminder of how historical events and figures can be interpreted or reimagined to discuss contemporary issues. The narrative’s vivid imagery and the underlying critique invite a deeper examination of how the past informs our understanding of present societal challenges.

          Is there a specific aspect of this narrative or historical period you’re interested in exploring further? User What do the enclosures have to do with any of this ? GPT

          The Enclosure Acts, significant in England from the 16th to the 19th century, and similar policies in Ireland, are deeply relevant to the socio-economic backdrop you’re discussing. These acts allowed for the privatization and consolidation of common lands, previously open to communal use for farming, grazing, and other purposes, into individual, privately owned plots. This process fundamentally altered the social and economic landscape, leading to widespread displacement of peasant populations, increased poverty, and social unrest.

          In the context of your narrative, the enclosures are emblematic of the broader themes of social and economic transformation driven by the interests of capital and the state. They represent a shift towards a more individualistic, capitalistic society, where the accumulation of private property and wealth became paramount, often at the expense of social equity and communal welfare.

          The enclosures can be seen as a form of socio-economic ‘infection,’ to use your metaphor, where the prioritization of private gain over communal good led to deep social divides and unrest, similar to the unrest and resistance movements like those of the “Whiteboys” in Ireland. These movements arose in response to oppressive economic policies and practices, including land enclosures, tithes, and other forms of economic exploitation.

          Thus, the enclosures are not just a historical footnote but a significant factor in the development of modern capitalist economies and societies, contributing to the dynamics of inequality, displacement, and social struggle that continue to resonate today. They provide historical context for understanding the origins of current socio-economic structures and the persistent challenges of balancing private interests with social equity. User How is this relevant to the discussion of closed AI companies who train their models on all of humanity’s common intellectual heritage and then keep the AGI models to themselves ? GPT

          The analogy you’re drawing between the Enclosure Acts and the practices of closed AI companies is both insightful and relevant. Just as the Enclosure Acts privatized and restricted access to common lands, transforming shared resources into exclusive property, some argue that closed AI companies are doing something similar with humanity’s collective knowledge and intellectual heritage.

          Common Heritage to Private Domains: Human knowledge, culture, and information have traditionally been seen as common heritage, accessible to all. Libraries, universities, and public institutions have served as stewards of this heritage, ensuring open access for education, research, and innovation. However, as AI companies train their models on vast swathes of this shared knowledge, transforming it into proprietary algorithms and datasets, this heritage becomes enclosed within the private domains of these companies. Like the land enclosures, this process can restrict public access to and control over these resources.

          Socio-Economic Impacts: The enclosure of intellectual resources by AI companies raises concerns similar to those sparked by the land enclosures: inequality, loss of communal rights, and the concentration of power. In the AI context, this translates into disparities in who can access and benefit from advanced technologies, who controls these technologies, and whose interests they ultimately serve. The risk is that the benefits of AI and AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) might accrue to a select few, reinforcing existing inequalities and creating new forms of digital divide.

          Ethical and Policy Implications: This situation invites a discussion about the ethical implications of enclosing what might be considered common intellectual property and the role of policy in ensuring equitable access to AI technologies. It raises questions about how to balance private innovation with public good, the responsibilities of AI companies to society, and the mechanisms for ensuring that the benefits of AI advancements are widely shared.

          Public vs. Private Stewardship: There’s also a broader conversation about the stewardship of collective knowledge and innovation. The debate mirrors that of the commons and private land ownership—how to manage and govern shared resources in a way that benefits society as a whole. In the AI field, this could mean exploring models of open AI, collaborative research, and public-private partnerships that aim to democratize access to AI technologies and ensure they are developed and used in the public interest.

          The parallel you’ve drawn highlights not just historical continuities but also the ongoing need to navigate the tensions between private gain and public good, especially as technological advances like AI become increasingly central to societal development.

    • Zink@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      7 months ago

      Think of it like corporate Darwinism. The purpose of a corporation is to make money. In broad strokes, this means many decent organizations are acquired or put out of business, with the greedy money-first companies getting huge.

  • renzev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    7 months ago

    Microsoft: small and soft in name, huge and hard in reality?
    Also, cool of you to include a transcript

  • topherclay@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    7 months ago

    “expensive monetarily but petty in actions”

    Sounds like the meme rubrick had a word count requirement.

  • mryessir@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    OpenAI is just a mask of Satan. Apple is just a contender for hell and doesn’t run things there. Yet.

  • pewpew@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Apple is definitely not pretty in actions, that’s what they want you to think

    • lemmesay@discuss.tchncs.deOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      7 months ago

      costs me 100 dollars each year just so that I can push an app to their app store, even if I make zero bucks off of it(and if I did, they’d want an additional 30% share of it).
      not to mention that I can’t develop an app without a mac – an artificial requirement created by them.

      it is expensive for developers that aren’t in the west

    • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      The hardware is expensive, the licensing is expensive, the hardware requires accessories you don’t from other companies (dongles, so many dongles), and everything they do is hostile to repairs. Are there any aspects in which they offer a high value proposition?

      • MxM111@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        I am an apple phone user from iPhone1. (While I do not consider myself apple fanboy, switching to android phone is just too much hustle), I have not purchased dongles for myself ever. I have purchased one dongle for my family - for daughter to use it with her headphones, (but androids are not better here with headphone jacks). I do not want to spend much money on my phone, so I buy top model of the phone and wait about 5 years before I switch. Apple is excellent with software updates so all the iPhones always run the latest software. I suspect this would not work as well with droids - software support at least few years ago was less long. So I totally think that I save money with iPhones. Also, have you looked at flagman android phone prices? They are similar or even more expensive than iPhone.

        I do understand, of course, that different patter of phone usage may lead to androids being better/cheaper for other people, but not for everyone.

  • MxM111@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    32
    ·
    7 months ago

    In what sense Apple is expensive monetary?

    In any case if this is a face off, Apple will win - it has greater, much grater loyal customer base. Sooner or later Apple will have AppleGPT and will include premium subscription into Apple One plan, or whatever it is called. And I am telling this as both an Apple user and ChatGPT paid user.

    • intrepid@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      A trillion dollar company demanding 30% cut of revenue of small developers, on top of annual developer fees and exorbitantly priced hardware with zero reparability and severe environmental impact isn’t monetarily expensive enough for you? That isn’t loyalty. It’s stupid fanaticism that harms everyone else. And I don’t want to even start about the petty part.

      • MyFairJulia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 months ago

        Don‘t forget the Core Technology Fee they will raise if you do wish to offer your app outside of the app store and you weren‘t qualified for the Apple Developer Enterprise program.

        And don‘t forget that in order to be eligible for sideloading you have to have at least one million downloads on the App Store.

        And don‘t forget that your app still has to go through the App Review process so you have exactly no additional freedom if you live in the european economical area.

        I sure hope the EU keeps kicking Apples ass. I love iOS but i hate the lack of freedom.

        Btw, does anyone know whether visionOS even supports sideloading in the EEA.

      • Black_Gulaman@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I laugh everytime I see fanbois biting the bait even if it was a very mild uninspired bait. Makes it easy to tag moronic fanatics and identify them in the future.

    • words_number@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Apple is exactly as shit as every other tech company, because they have to be in order to win the capitalism game.

      But yeah, they sure have got a lot of zealots…

      The foundational tenet of “the Cult of Mac” is that buying products from a $3t company makes you a member of an oppressed ethnic minority and therefore every criticism of that corporation is an ethnic slur.

      (by Cory Doctorow, here’s the recent article: https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/22/reality-distortion-field/#three-trillion-here-three-trillion-there-pretty-soon-youre-talking-real-money )

      • MyFairJulia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        To think there was a time when IMO Apple could convince people with great products.

        (Macintosh SE explodes in the background due to overheating)

        Then again i‘ve mostly seen old Apple computers on Youtube.

    • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      In what sense is Apple not expensive monetarily, is a better question.

      Their hardware is way more expensive than their competitors and they go out of their way to make them difficult to repair, all while making it difficult for third party repair shops to get the parts and schematics that they need. The genius bar goes out of their way to make you pay for a new laptop rather than do a repair that could be done for >100x cheaper by anyone else.