The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

There was a Twitter poll (https://www.globalnerdy.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/fake-money-for-criminals-600x327.png) earlier this year that I missed, but I just saw it and found it compelling and wanted to hear your thoughts.

?

OK, so option A is Uber.
Option B is Air B&B.
Option C is maybe....crypto.  Bitcoin specifically?
And option D.....ChatGPT?

I've never heard of ChatGPT.  After reading the Wiki page on it I can't say I really understand, nor do I think I would use it.

Uber is a very useful service.  Old school cab companies never changed over 50 years and were unreliable.

I voted for the first option, as it's the only one I've used.

A, B, and C (crypto) are 100% correct, and I'm pretty sure D is indeed ChatGPT.

masterfins, ChatGPT can be (and is) used by lazy people to write speeches, reports, and all sorts of things where you just need to sound like you know what you're talking about.

Uber's business model, from the very beginning, was based on the fact that ridesharing (private individuals) isn't required to follow the same regulations as licensed cabs.  And if we don't think those regulations are necessary, why have them for cabs, either?  The same dynamic applies to Airbnb and hotels.

(Of course, the answer to the last question is that these regulations were created after rampant greed and abuse by businesses created a demand for Something To Be Done About This.)

A - uber - i've used it occasionally, i'm ok with it the prices seem to be in line
A-2 - the extension of uber is the food delivery apps (uber eats, grubhub, doordash) I'm not on board with these. It's an unregulated mess that doubles the price of your meal. I'd rather pick it up myself.

B - AirBNB - this started off as a good idea, but nowadays the value doesn't exist. I'd rather stay at a hotel that's properly regulated and cheaper than someone's "investment" property .. which btw is also a contributing factor in the housing crisis.

C - crypto currencies - not into this at all, it's a high tech pyramid scheme. If you're in at the ground level you milk the suckers that follow you and a bunch of people lose a bunch of money in the long run. scam scam scam

D - ChatGPT - I'm ok with this. Machine learning in general provides a ton of pathways for innovation. All it is really is crunching massive amounts of data and using feedback to determine if the way it was used was good or bad. and then re-inforcing those decisions. Garbage in / garbage out really.

For me, Uber is definitely the best.  I don't really see a downside.  It's a way for people to make extra money, where I live, it's MUUUUUUCH cheaper and it's not like people are buying up all the extra cars so they can Uber.  Where I live in S. Florida, cabs just aren't usable.  I've taken like one in my entire life in an absolute emergency.  They might as well not exist.  Uber is a game changer.

I don't like AirBNB.  It's part of our housing crisis, like Fau said, but also, it takes neighborhoods and turns them into hotels.  It's not in line with community and you get frat kids partying for the week in a residential neighborhood.  I'm sure it has its benefits, but it's a net negative.

Crypto -- I think there's merit here, but we haven't figured it all out yet.  It's bad environmentally (the main ones are, anyway).  But I do this that it can work conceptually, though I don't own any.

ChatGPT or AI in general -- it doesn't matter what I think, because it's here and it's here to stay.  It's like fighting mother nature; it's better to learn to adapt to it than to prevent it from doing what it's going to do.  I hate that we're using it for art, as that's the worst use for it.  But I think that it's going to be a great help when used as guidance rather than replacement.  We are on our way to Star Trek and AI is a huge part of that.

I like most others have only used Uber. I had a few cab drivers I could call directly to their cell back in the day and get a cheaper fare if they were available.

I think AirBNB has gone overboard. I think it would have been great if it had stayed with property already being rented like ski chalets, beach homes,  mountain cabins, etc. It didn't.

Crypto sucks.

ChatGPT I have little experience with but understand that it may or may not be factual. User beware and if you have to double check the research you might as well do the work yourself.

If professional taxis were more easily reachable, I would definitely use them.  Uber is a trash company and many of these Silicon Valley startups are run by absolute dirtbag scammers.

But every time I've tried to call a cab, the experience has been terrible.  There's definitely needs to be some sort of PayPal-but-for-cabs, where the major cab companies all agree to consolidate on a hailing/payment service (like how many internet merchants take PayPal today).

I'm not trying to defend Uber specifically.  They are probably trash, like you say.

But between them, Lyft, and whatever other service might pop up, it seems like the only way.

I understand in NYC or big cities where this is a way of life.  But if I were to call a cab right now, it would take 30 minutes to arrive and cost 3X as much, historically.  An uber driver will be at my house in 3 minutes.  I think it's probably area specific.

As with all things, it's how you use it. The innovation isn't bad, but that doesn't mean that bad things can't happen because of it.

I voted D. I look at ChatGPT much like the internet itself. The internet can be used for good and very much has changed the lives of many people in a positive way, but certainly there are negative aspects to it as well. I don't use ChatGPT every day, but I do use it, mostly just to find some information that I probably should know or maybe think I know but I'm not certain enough about to state with confidence. There's also a lot of bad information being put out around the technology that just isn't factual. People watch a bit too much TV and movies and think the plot lines are real. Actually a lot of the plot lines are pure garbage from a factual standpoint. Entertaining to be sure, but not really much to do with reality.

Actually we aren't really that much closer to Star Trek today than when it was created by Gene Roddenberry almost 60 years ago. About the only thing that's really a part of our lives today is the fact that we all walk around with a personal communicator device. Beyond that, we really haven't seen any of the innovations. Phasers. Space Travel. Beaming you from one location to another. All pure science fiction still. I guess you could consider going to the moon space travel, but they were already sending people into space when Space Trek was being created, so really nothing new in that regard has happened. We are still way away from the type of Space Travel envisioned in Star Trek.

Another thing that at least has some merit is that thing that Bones used to do medical analysis (Tricorder). We do have things like MRI's that actually do detect some things better than what we had in the 60's but even then they only do analysis and they are huge machines. They don't actually heal you which Bones used to do as well.

As a side note, I used ChatGPT to find the correct spelling of Roddenberry although I'm sure I could have just googled it, I didn't really need ChatGPT. I find myself using ChatGPT in place of Google a lot. I also looked up the name of the device that Bones used, but I thought the Tricorder was what Spock used were they the same thing? Anyway apparently there's something akin to a Tricorder that being developed that maybe we'll see in few years or so but it's a far cry from what Bones was able to do.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/medical-device-used-in-star-trek-is-now-a-reality

I disagree.

I think that AI is way advanced from where it was -- we're on our way conceptually to saying "computer, what's blah blah blah".  Between Siri technology and AI, a lot can be done already.

3D printers are essentially replicators.  Astronauts are printing their tools in space, rather than bringing everything with them.  We are creating meat in labs.

We have physically transported materials (3 atoms, but conceptually, that appears possible).

We have all of the world's knowledge on a tablet in our pocket at all times.

VR innovations (plus AI) are the first steps towards the holodeck.

When I think of Star Trek innovations, I don't think of space travel.  It's mostly daily life stuff.

Well maybe we just have a difference of opinion on how close we are to the vision that Star Trek had. Sure there's a lot of things that have some potential future uses, but it's still mostly not a reality other than the communicators. If you think VR is anything even remotely close to the holodeck, then we agree to disagree. 3D printers are cool too, but all it's producing is the shape, it doesn't come anywhere close to producing an actual working product. You still have to 3D print the parts and then assemble it for anything that requires parts and that's only for things which can be created by a 3D printer which is pretty small. It's still a long way from replicators in my humble opinion.

I get where you are coming from Dave and I think your opinion on this is very similar to how a lot of people look at it, but I tend to take the opposite view. We always see some new innovation and think that it's going to happen in a few years when in reality it takes decades if not centuries if ever to achieve. Even the iPhones that we have today, that technology was around in the 70's, it took another 30 years to really make it a common everyday thing. It takes much longer from concept to reality than we envision.

It depends. Tech comes in booms.  It's hard to predict what will go fast.

It was 66 years between the Wright Brothers first flight and landing on the moon.



Oh, also Star Trek technology: The viewscreen, which was a completely invented technology, is essentially just Facetime.

Not really. The reason that happened so fast was because the government basically mandated that it happen and poured billions of dollars and man hours into research to make it happen. That just doesn't happen 99.9% of the time. Since Apollo, what do we have to show? Go ask Neil DeGrasse Tyson what he thinks about the space program and what needs to be done about it.

Not really. It took how long to get from TV's to Facetime? That's about 100 years. Technology moves a lot slower than we think. The fact you think viewscreens were invented by Star Trek is the real issue here.

Hypodermic spray is also a thing in real life.

This is a jet injector from the 80s that delivers medication through the skin without needles:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/90/Jet_injector_gun.jpg/1024px-Jet_injector_gun.jpg)

I think that had needles, just not one long one. I still have the scar from my Smallpox vaccination, but maybe that wasn't quite the same technology as I got that in the 70's I'm pretty sure or perhaps it was a hypodermic that I got, still left a scar on my arm so not that great in my humble opinion. Also, this technology was available prior to the Star Trek TV series. Star Trek didn't invent this, it was actually invented in the 30's and really isn't used that much today.

Option D is TurnItIn.com.