In many cases, Alzuhair writes, human supply chain managers are no longer being asked to override automatic shipments or intervene when discrepancies occur under their jurisdiction.
Don’t worry guys, AI will revolutionize everything. You won’t have to think at all!
Except AI is trash at doing what it’s advertised to do, it makes everybody dumber, and its shills will blame you once it inevitably mucks everything up.
Except AI is trash at doing what it’s advertised to do, it makes everybody dumber, and its shills will blame you once it inevitably mucks everything up.
We don’t even have “AI”. We have LLMs, aka chatbots, aka glorified digital parrots that, just because they’re eloquent and sound competent, management with little to no technical expertise feels can replace large parts of the workforce.
If we just called it “cyberparrots” instead of “AI”, maybe more people would their limited utility and the utter folly of having these take over ever larger portions of business procedures.
Isn’t it incredible that “AI” is sold as a product that is ‘PhD level smart’ (lol), but if it doesn’t do the straightforward thing you asked of it then it’s your fault.
They don’t provide instructions for it because they can’t provide instructions; what works on one version might not work next week. But it’s still your fault if it doesn’t do what it’s supposed to.
Maybe they mean a PhD in gaslighting. That’s all I ever get from AI search results, and worse AI SEO spam that has ruined DDG results.
Try finding out when the Walmart Car seat recycling program is this year. A dozen spam blogs will tell you it’s this April, late May, last October 2026, and ended already. Some say it’s officially announced (Walmart has no info about this years event) but never provide a link to the announcement and it’s all just hallucinated bullshit that is there because there is an info vacuum on the terms you searched.
It’s killing what was left of the moderately useful internet.
Isn’t it incredible that “AI” is sold as a product that is ‘PhD level smart’ (lol), but if it doesn’t do the straightforward thing you asked of it then it’s your fault.
PhD level and up are notorious for over specialisation.
My university had a personal assistant, dedicated to 2 professors. Half their job was to make sure they made it to lectures on time. They still managed to be late sometimes.
As smart as the average PhD … when you ask the PhD something completely outside of their area of expertise and pressure them to make up an answer that sounds plausible, even if they don’t know the actual answer.
I was at a Bojangles earlier this year and they had an AI doing their drive thru. I was trying to order a meal, but didn’t want a drink. That confused the heck out of the AI. It kept trying to force a drink in me. Gave up and walked into the store. Guy behind the counter was smiling and said something like, “we can hear what you’re saying to it. Next time just pull around. We got you.”
Oh, ya got me! Clearly an AI never makes mistakes, and everyone who tells you otherwise, including me, is clearly lying!
So you can’t trust what people say ever. You need to always see video.
Wait, but now video can be easily manipulated by AI. I can make evidence that never happened.
So you can’t trust people. You can’t trust video. I guess nothing ever happens, and if someone says something happened, you can’t trust the proof now either. Guess nothing ever happens.
Nobody is programming those laws because it’s not possible with the way that LLMs are currently built and trained. Instead of The Three Laws, which are inviolable but in certain edge cases insufficient, we have Anthropic’s Constitution, which is 23,000 words worth of good intentions which Claude should keep in the back of its mind while it does whatever it wants to do.
Don’t worry guys, AI will revolutionize everything. You won’t have to think at all!
Except AI is trash at doing what it’s advertised to do, it makes everybody dumber, and its shills will blame you once it inevitably mucks everything up.
We don’t even have “AI”. We have LLMs, aka chatbots, aka glorified digital parrots that, just because they’re eloquent and sound competent, management with little to no technical expertise feels can replace large parts of the workforce.
If we just called it “cyberparrots” instead of “AI”, maybe more people would their limited utility and the utter folly of having these take over ever larger portions of business procedures.
“You’re prompting it wrong”
Isn’t it incredible that “AI” is sold as a product that is ‘PhD level smart’ (lol), but if it doesn’t do the straightforward thing you asked of it then it’s your fault.
They don’t provide instructions for it because they can’t provide instructions; what works on one version might not work next week. But it’s still your fault if it doesn’t do what it’s supposed to.
Are you excited yet??
Maybe they mean a PhD in gaslighting. That’s all I ever get from AI search results, and worse AI SEO spam that has ruined DDG results.
Try finding out when the Walmart Car seat recycling program is this year. A dozen spam blogs will tell you it’s this April, late May, last October 2026, and ended already. Some say it’s officially announced (Walmart has no info about this years event) but never provide a link to the announcement and it’s all just hallucinated bullshit that is there because there is an info vacuum on the terms you searched.
It’s killing what was left of the moderately useful internet.
Have you ever tried to get a PhD to do anything?
PhD level and up are notorious for over specialisation.
My university had a personal assistant, dedicated to 2 professors. Half their job was to make sure they made it to lectures on time. They still managed to be late sometimes.
I have tried, it’s only possible if you butter him up with cookies first, and that only had a fifty percent chance!
deleted by creator
Even an identical prompt to an identical model can return both good and bad results, just depending on RNG.
It’s about as smart as the average PhD in my experience.
As smart as the average PhD … when you ask the PhD something completely outside of their area of expertise and pressure them to make up an answer that sounds plausible, even if they don’t know the actual answer.
With the big difference that e.g. GPT isn’t on an expert level in anything.
It’s about as smart sounding as the average PhD in my experience.
Last year McDonalds tried a test of replacing human drive thru workers with an AI running the speaker board. It was shut down after only 3 weeks.
My favorite bit was a guy trying to order a big mac meal large with a coke.
What the AI heard, was 81,000 bottles of Dasani water. Then asked “Is this correct?” To which the guy responded “81,000 bottles of fucking water???”
To which the AI added a big mac meal medium with a water. Then asked if his updated order was correct. He just drove off.
I was at a Bojangles earlier this year and they had an AI doing their drive thru. I was trying to order a meal, but didn’t want a drink. That confused the heck out of the AI. It kept trying to force a drink in me. Gave up and walked into the store. Guy behind the counter was smiling and said something like, “we can hear what you’re saying to it. Next time just pull around. We got you.”
How do we know that actually happened? Is there a video? Who recorded it?
Why is this even in question. That’s exactly the type of shit that AI does.
deleted by creator
Oh, ya got me! Clearly an AI never makes mistakes, and everyone who tells you otherwise, including me, is clearly lying!
So you can’t trust what people say ever. You need to always see video.
Wait, but now video can be easily manipulated by AI. I can make evidence that never happened.
So you can’t trust people. You can’t trust video. I guess nothing ever happens, and if someone says something happened, you can’t trust the proof now either. Guess nothing ever happens.
Stop building so many straw mans. It is a simple question.
If AI is “responsible” for the well-being of humans…DEAD humans can’t get sick. DEAD humans don’t have to pay rent. DEAD humans stay dead.
The logic is solid.
The Three Laws strike again.
Well. It would be the zeroth law, first of all, but the three laws would most definitely not allow humans to die.
The whole point of I, Robot was cases where the three laws were circumvented in various ways.
And how many of those circumventions were the result of humans being stupid?
Nobody is programming those laws into AI. It’s not required.
Nobody is programming those laws because it’s not possible with the way that LLMs are currently built and trained. Instead of The Three Laws, which are inviolable but in certain edge cases insufficient, we have Anthropic’s Constitution, which is 23,000 words worth of good intentions which Claude should keep in the back of its mind while it does whatever it wants to do.
i mean i guess total collapse is a form of revolution
The final frontier