Planning documents for "Scout" say the plan is to "make people addicted" to the tool before adding new features.
  • melsaskca@lemmy.caEnglish
    5·
    6 hours ago

    I can’t fault them for this business plan. It has worked for the opioid business professionals time and time again, for centuries!

  • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
    16·
    12 hours ago

    Have they tried making it better, I feel like I’m more likely to become addicted to it if it was good.

  • eleitl@lemmy.zipEnglish
    4·
    9 hours ago

    If it’s agentic it’s going to burn through tokens even faster, so what’s their business model?

  • BigMacHole@thelemmy.clubEnglish
    23·
    14 hours ago

    We’re going to MAKE people ADDICTED by making a REALLY Good Product! SOLVING annoying Problems! TREATING Customers respectfully! FORCING ourselves Onto people like Donald Trump on Little Girls!

  • vala@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    2·
    9 hours ago

    When you ask an LLM to name itself, “Scout” is a very common name for it to come up with. That and “echo”.

  • Kaligalis@lemmy.worldEnglish
    11·
    22 hours ago

    No shit, Sherlock.
    And people would actually happily get addicted to an AI assistant which is reliable, safe, capable, kind, and fast.
    They really should try making a great product. Then they don’t need any tricks. People love great products.

    • AlteredEgo@lemmy.mlEnglish
      3·
      10 hours ago

      And local and under your control. As a “second brain” that isn’t sentient but intelligent to assist you AI has great potential. In a few years we’ll probably have the models and new hardware to run good enough models locally on cheap enough hardware.

      But by then they’ll have drummed enough support for “muh copyright” to buy legislation for AI licensing and make all AI models have to pay a license fee to… “someone”. Like that poor writer who had his work illegally read by an AI. So then no open source models can exist and they have the monopoly. Big win for the little guy lol.

  • kablez@lemmy.worldEnglish
    55·
    1 day ago

    My non Linux savvy spouse is currently dual booting Linux Mint because Windows has become so frustrating to use.

    Mint isn’t perfect. We’ve run into a few bugs and shortcomings. But there’s a big difference between dealing with genuine issues in an OS and using one that feels actively hostile and designed to exploit the user.

    If both experiences can be frustrating, why choose the one that’s frustrating by design (unless you absolutely have to) ?