@Joseph_of_Earth that is the bet I am making since 2020 already: different SaaS, different companies, media outlets, influencers... all those segments will try to find a way to monetize their audience, which will include either paid accounts or accounts as part of some premium offering.

Myself, I just want to be a simple independent service provider.

Interesting take on how Medium is looking to make their me.dm instance financial sustainable by attaching it as a perk for paying Medium subscribers.

While this model is not for everyone, it helps to onboard Medium users to Mastodon by removing the barrier of creating an account, it covers the cost of running the server to scale with its size, and it explores the different funding models you can have on the Fediverse that you can't on a centralized platform.


@ben they don't seem to be exclusive options, and I for one would love to see more media outlets creating their own instances.

It would be one step to get them back in control of their own content distribution, it could open potential revenue streams (subscriber-only follows, access to exclusive content?) but most importantly it could be the beginning of the end of "eyeball-driven" headlines and editorializing.

@eibhear @matrix and while we don't have that, people could use a service that gives them an unified account for both and instances, like communick.com.

I'm getting fed up with Mastodon. It needs a better algorithm.

I keep seeing people claiming that algorithms are evil, but that's not true. Algorithms can be evil, but they can also be really useful.

My Mastodon feed is overwhelmed with post from the same people, because they post most often. So good content becomes a needle in a haystack.

This chronological timeline is not a good social media experience and I find myself checking Mastodon less and less.

Is there any hope of this changing?

@jeff @ljs @ldiamand @carnage4life

You and the others writing "glorified REST clients" are more representative of the "knowledge industry" than any expert in kernel memory subsystems.

The "experts" get so stuck in their bubbles they fail to see the practical changes that are bound to happen. Only after all the many "silly" waves come together and ends up dragging them to accept the new reality (whatever it becomes), they go to claim that in *hindsight* that the changes were obvious.

@ljs @ldiamand @raphael @carnage4life I’ve had it write a non-trivial command line tool in Swift (pulling data from S3 with user-defined filtering/sorting for output) with just a few tweaks. Much faster than I could have done myself. A lack of good IDE integration is the main thing keeping me from using it right now.

Maybe “reset” is a bit hyperbolic, but I do think the productivity impact will still be pretty profound.

@ldiamand @ljs @raphael @carnage4life And jobs where writing is foundational.

Frankly, this stuff doesn’t need to replace a conscious human — it just needs to augment them well enough to allow them to do the work of two conscious people.

So what if they have to take a moment to correct the occasional factual error? That’s still enough to result in a massive increase in productivity.


> imagine trying to deny that iPhone impact after it happened

*AFTER* it happened. What I am asking is for you to define the objective criteria for your argument *BEFORE* it happens.

And no, you did not provide any criteria. You are just twisting words, dismissing what I write with sarcasm, misinterpreting things in a way that doesn't make you reflect on the crux of the argument and failing to provide one single *objective* measure for us to test any claim.


I am asking you for examples of measurable evidence. If you think that is not a good example, feel free to provide one.


I am not trying to "win" anything here. I'm just trying to understand if there is anything here that can be objectively measured.

You started with the whole "willing to be updated by the evidence", so the first order of business is to establish precisely what "evidence" you are looking for, and so far your responses are looking like "I will know it when I see it".

@ljs @filippie509

Parsing error: what I meant was the "majority of editors will have one plugin to integrate with Co-pilot", not that majority of plugins will themselves have some integration.

@ljs @filippie509

No one said anything about "entire industry".

The exact words were "reset of knowledge work in a profound way", and this is why I am saying that we need a precise definition.

@ljs @filippie509

The "silly first example" is *exactly* how my co-workers are using it. The jr ones have a VS code plugin, the senior ones integrated with vim.

And the fact that you think it is "silly" shows how subjective and pointless this debate really if you are not willing to define a precise way to establish the definitions.

@ljs @filippie509

How many startups offering some variation of "give a prompt of what you would like your business site to look like and we will generate a template with color scheme, layout pages, all compatible with Wordpress and this many plugins" would you like to see in order to accept that "AI has caused an impact in the knowledge industry"?

@ljs @filippie509

Again: what qualifies as "profound reset of an entire industry"?

If I say "The majority of IDE or editor plugins will have some sort of integration with Co-Pilot (or equivalent)", does this count as a "reset of the industry"?

If I say "there are startups now that take all your bank statements and generate your tax report, but you (or an accountant) still need to review it before sending to the IRS", does that count as a reset?

@ljs @filippie509

We couldn't even agree on whether SO is a "fuzzy" or "exact" tool, so first we need to agree on a common definition of "reset knowledge work".

@ljs @filippie509

Quite the opposite, the main point from OP is that skeptics are dismissing the new developments on the grounds of "it hasn't not lived up to the hype and doesn't bring anything revolutionary, so it will amount to nothing like everything else in the past", and that's the part where the skeptics are wrong about.

So, to clear up: for you, what are the required conditions for you to say "I was wrong, and this wave of AI did cause significant impact in knowledge work?"

@ljs @filippie509

The question then is "what are the actual criteria to determine if you are right or wrong".

I don't think "the claim of "the impact of deepfakes, generative AI and ChatGPT is going to reset knowledge work" implies the elimination of certain jobs, which is the counterargument that the blog post you linked seems to make.

Show older
Communick Social

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!