Technology
News community around technology, social media platforms, information technology and governmental policy surrounding it.
What doesn't fit here?
The core of the story has to be technology focused.
- If article mentions "AI" in a sentence and then talks about business economics that doesn't make it tech news.
- Gaming is too many layers removed from technology. There are many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Transporation is too many layers removed from technology. EVs while use many cool technologies have many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Entertainment is too many layers removed from technology. While sometimes it can fit here, business or cultural aspects of it are a better fit for dedicated communities.
- Cybersecurity. While it heavily focuses on technology, most of the time it's too technical for most people who are not already invested in it. Should be posted in a dedicated communities unless it has broader connection to other tech areas.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title. If you don't like the title of article, look for an alternative source instead of editorializing it.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title. Opinion articles refer to articles that their publisher doesn't explictly endorse.
Country prefix
Country prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) if the news is from a local publisher who doesn't clearly mention the country.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
view the rest of the comments
It's because GPT5 was such a disappointment.
Partly because they hyped it up beyond belief and partly because the results are actually bad. GPT3 to 4 was a big step up and with all the marketing people expected 4 to 5 to be just as big of a step. It turned out to be mostly a step sideways and in many aspects even a step back. Energy consumption is rumoured to be up, hallucinations are up and user experience is way down. At the same time all of the very public and high profile promises made are being broken and for a change people actually noticed.
The sentiment in the market was down for a while, but GPT5 release really kicked everything into high gear. Earlier people were disapointed "AI" didn't live up to the hype. Regular folks use it all the time as a replacement search engine, because Google had gotten so bad. But in businesses adoption was slow and where it was used the gains promised weren't seen. If the product was given away for free, people would use it, but even modestly paid subscriptions weren't taking off. But people thought: Hey, this is just the current level of tech, the next level is going to be so much better and improve a lot right? GPT5 proved that wasn't really true, so people lost faith fast.
LLM system are rapidly running into diminishing returns with larger models not yielding better results and sometimes even worse results. They also run into the issue they've poisoned the well. They used to train on data from the internet, but with the internet being flooded by output from older AI models, it's eating it's own shit. That's really bad for the performance of the newer models. Especially on things like coding and such, where it relies on code examples to produce new code. With Stackoverflow dying due to a lot of things, but AI being a big factor, there isn't as much of that as there used to be. Same for other stuff on the internet, once you kill the internet that great source of data is lost.
Now I don't think it's as worse (or good depending on your point of view) as some articles make it out to be. Many companies still see AI as the infinite money well the marketing claims it to be. A lot of people use it all the time, even though they've had negative experiences with it. But it's somewhat good to see some reality seeping in here and there.
I fully expect the shit to hit the fan and the bubble to burst in a catastrophic way. This will be bad, way worse than when the dotcom bubble burst. It's not going to be good for anyone. But better it burst soon than keep pumping it up further.
Well, GPT-5 was a disappointment because it didn't live up to expectations, but will it really cause the bubble to burst?
Because user frogbellyratbone_ gave a good explanation.