Talk:AI degradation: Difference between revisions
Add topicLatest comment: Saturday at 04:43 by Rudxain in topic Relevance discussion
→Relevance discussion: Reply |
m Rudxain moved page Talk:How you are getting F*****; AI edition to Talk:AI degradation: see Talk/Discussion page |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:ok first time. thanks for the input. Ill change the title, but really I left out of the technical details for your readers first. I can show you what they are doing all the way down to the code itself. We have kids killing themselves from this and don't know of a better title than this. Your kids killing themselves in the name of AI is definitely a way that we are getting f******. Although I agree with the title change, I do not need to change the writing. If not, just take it off. My feelings won't be hurt, but it will give me an idea of this sites actual genuine purpose. Tomato tomato on the bad for consumers comment. Consumer rights is all knowledge. If it is being held from you, than that is anti trust. That simple. We are not judges and find that statement unfair in context. I followed every rule laid out for this. [[User:Buttmunch|Buttmunch]] ([[User talk:Buttmunch|talk]]) 16:25, 11 May 2026 (UTC) | :ok first time. thanks for the input. Ill change the title, but really I left out of the technical details for your readers first. I can show you what they are doing all the way down to the code itself. We have kids killing themselves from this and don't know of a better title than this. Your kids killing themselves in the name of AI is definitely a way that we are getting f******. Although I agree with the title change, I do not need to change the writing. If not, just take it off. My feelings won't be hurt, but it will give me an idea of this sites actual genuine purpose. Tomato tomato on the bad for consumers comment. Consumer rights is all knowledge. If it is being held from you, than that is anti trust. That simple. We are not judges and find that statement unfair in context. I followed every rule laid out for this. [[User:Buttmunch|Buttmunch]] ([[User talk:Buttmunch|talk]]) 16:25, 11 May 2026 (UTC) | ||
:I agree. I propose this gets merged with [[Artificial intelligence|AI]] and/or moved to the author's user-space [[User:Rudxain|Rudxain]] ([[User talk:Rudxain|talk]]) 04:43, 30 May 2026 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 04:46, 30 May 2026
Relevance discussion
[edit source]I can see the effort that's been made to keep this consumer connected, but it still feels a bit 'things wrong with the general state of AI'. maybe just needs paring back a bit? idk
also, things that are bad for consumers are not necessarily consumer rights issues - model regressions are, for exmple, just a case of a company making a product of low quality.
Also the title 100% needs to change - the Wiki is not Louis' youtube channel, and the tone of titles should not match those of his videos. Keith (talk) 10:07, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
- ok first time. thanks for the input. Ill change the title, but really I left out of the technical details for your readers first. I can show you what they are doing all the way down to the code itself. We have kids killing themselves from this and don't know of a better title than this. Your kids killing themselves in the name of AI is definitely a way that we are getting f******. Although I agree with the title change, I do not need to change the writing. If not, just take it off. My feelings won't be hurt, but it will give me an idea of this sites actual genuine purpose. Tomato tomato on the bad for consumers comment. Consumer rights is all knowledge. If it is being held from you, than that is anti trust. That simple. We are not judges and find that statement unfair in context. I followed every rule laid out for this. Buttmunch (talk) 16:25, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
- I agree. I propose this gets merged with AI and/or moved to the author's user-space Rudxain (talk) 04:43, 30 May 2026 (UTC)