I was about to say …

Vox can speak for itself. Big sections of the public knew they were being sold a bill of goods.

She specifically said that the new tech would “increase” and “turbocharge” fraud. She did not use that example as some new kind of fraud, only that it could be done more effectively or more easily.

There’s an important thing that the CEO provides that no AI can: the acceptance of risk.

On a day-to-day basis the CEO makes decisions, ignores expert advice, knocks off early for tee time, etc. For this work they are wildly overpaid and could easily be replaced by having their responsibilities divvied up amongst a small group of people in leadership roles.

To see the true purpose of the CEO we need to look at a bigger scale - the quarter-to-quarter scale. What could be bigger than that in the world of the MBA?

Every quarter the CEO must have the company meet the financial performance expectations of the board/owner(s)/shareholders. Failure is likely to result in them losing their job and getting a reputation as an underperformer, thus ruining their career. If the company does poorly or those expectations are unreasonably high then the CEO must cut corners in the operation. This of course hampers their ability to meet expectations later, but they’ll make it through this quarter.

When (inevitably) too many corners have been cut something catastrophic will happen. Either the company’s reputation will go to shit with customers slowly, or a high-profile scandal will blow up in the company’s face.

This is the moment when the CEO provides their most valuable service: to fall (or be pushed) onto their sword. The CEO is fired, ousted, or resigns. This allows the board/owner/shareholders to get a new face in and demand that they fix the most egregious issues, or at least the most glaring ones that don’t cost too much to fix.

This service cannot be provided by an AI. Why? Because the AI is a creation of the company. If it is used as a scapegoat it solves nothing. The company is pointing at their own creation and saying “see, that’s the problem”. It’s much more effective to point at a human they didn’t make and scream that that person made a mistake.

That’s goddamned hilarious.

Characters in Jurassic Park are portrayed as flawed, imperfect people who make mistakes. None of the plot relies on them being idiots or anything, but people screw up, panic on occasion, and don’t know things from time to time.

Dr. Grant using a stick to test the fence is a mistake, albeit a small one without real consequences. While it doesn’t distract from his character arc of how he feels about kids, it is his character simply messing up.

I also disagree with the person you replied to. While their assessment is correct, Dr. Grant is a character with a lot of time working in the field and therefore has a lot of practical skills. He does way, way better than a doctorate in mathematics working in academia would. Writing off all people with a doctorate (or experts in general) as being hyper specialized is a mistake.

Wait, everyone on this site has told me that even a single casualty due to collateral damage is genocide!

I seem to recall a saying about pots and kettles…

Who are you, who are so wise in the ways of science?

George Lucas gonna George Lucas.

Mace Windu getting killed was the turning point and point of no return for the three film character arc of Anakin Skywalker. That’s a long way from “needlessly”. Sure the character didn’t have to be killed, but the impact of him being betrayed and killed was enormous. The plot of the third film (and the entire prequel trilogy) culminated with his death scene.

On rye MF

Send a bondulance, I’m having a stronk.

Yes, “on point” is slang, but only just recently. Slag is just a little further down the scale in terms of specialized language.

The real test is how accepted a word or phrase is with the larger population using a given language (while keeping a specific meaning in mind). This gets a little muddied with the lingo used by larger groups.

For instance the phrases “weird” and “cat lady” have both been co-opted by the major political parties in this election to decide their opponents. Because they each have so many members and because their discourse is covered by media outlets the new connotations of those phrases will be more widely known outside of the group and will stop being lingo much faster than the phrases you use privately with your family or coworkers.

“On point” used to be lingo in the military once upon a time, but because of the size of the military (and aided by the internet) it has become slang and is no longer a phrase only used by a certain group.

And there’s the rub. Lingo isn’t inherently evil, in fact it’s necessary to get through day-to-day life. You can’t refer to every tool you use on the job with a short sentence explaining what it is, you say it’s name and the people you work with know what you’re talking about. The only time lingo must be avoided is when talking about something you’re familiar with with someone who isn’t to avoid putting them off or confusing them.

The real danger is people not realizing how (contrived, constantly changing) lingo can be used to manipulate them, specifically how it drives tribalism and the “us versus them” mentality. This is especially important given how political movements and other groups behave online, and how prevalent this tactic has become over the past decade.

Lingo is a powerful social tool. Once you know to look for it, you see it everywhere.

Some lingo is always necessary for jobs to communicate complex ideas quickly. Everyone has terms and phrases used in their profession that are exclusive to it, as well as some that are exclusive to their workplace. People outside of their job don’t know the lingo, those inside do. In this way lingo is a double-edged sword: it eases communication, but creates a social barrier between those in the know and everyone else.

In an increasing number of places this isolating side effect has been used by certain groups as the motivation for them to contrive lingo. For a long time this was largely relegated to cults and other fringe groups that wanted to shore up the feeling of togetherness of the people within and keep them away from outsiders.

The big change was when groups found that by constantly changing the lingo they could induce two other effects: the exclusion of outsiders and exerting control over existing insiders. The MBA/business types are a prime example of this. For people in or seeking to be a part of the group knowing the latest buzzwords is a must, and not knowing them or using outdated ones opens them up to being ostracized. People who are “in” must constantly stay up to date, thus staying attentive to the trends of the group. At the same time people with a casual interest or interaction are actively dissuaded by how often unfamiliar words are used by members of the group.

This sort of weaponized use of lingo is much more widespread these days. Once you see it in this case you can find it in just about every flavor of modern political group and online forum. If you find a group that seems to always be changing its buzzwords, buyer beware.

I’m really, really hoping a lot of folks see that comment. Online communities are rife with intelligence agents actively trying to sway online discourse.

There’s a term in intelligence work for people who fight or support a cause they don’t fully understand: useful idiots. Anyone reading this, take a hard look at the facts of any situation. Do everything you can to cut down to the actual truth wherever possible. Make up your own mind. Don’t be a useful idiot.

Sanest Lemmy user.

Hezbollah operates with pagers and walkie talkies for OPSEC reasons. Israel has been intercepting them and placing small explosives in them for God only knows how long.

This week they set a fucking ton of them off, injuring a couple thousand people and killing 8, with quite a few bystanders getting hit. Just today there was a funeral for a Hezbollah member who got killed and all the walkie talkies at the event blew up.

I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.

Lemmy is an anus of a platform filled with lunatics.

Given that you think Putin is promising people immortality, I doubt it.