| Disclaimer: I think that we should not use blockchain (here we disagree), and I am not a big fan of generative AI (I think we kind of agree here). > I really don't understand how the hacker news groupthink can [...] say "there's absolutely nothing there". Blockchain doesn't solve anything other than cryptocurrencies that was not solved better before. But that leaves this one thing: cryptocurrencies; blockchains does enable cryptocurrencies in a way that was not possible before. The problem I have with cryptocurrencies is that I don't want them. That's not a technical argument, that's more a preference of what I believe society should do. So there is not nothing, but web3 is bullshit IMHO. > You know what bubble I saw excited about them? Not the tech bros, but artists interested in a new way of monetizing their work. Well, it's hard not to be excited by something that you don't really understand but that may bring you money. Doesn't mean NFTs are desirable. BTW you talk about them in the past, so somehow you do realize that apparently they were not desirable enough to survive, right? > Meanwhile, LLMs are almost exclusively trained and served by massive corporations I totally agree with that. I don't want Big Data to steal my data, use it to train models, and sell that back to me. I wish there would be a way to account for copyright and licensing in a decent manner, but I fear that the rich will win (that's capitalism, right?). Just as much as I believe that Bitcoin made more harm than good, I believe that generative AIs have the potential to make more harm than good. The problem is that companies don't think about whether they should do something - only whether it is profitable. And people typically love to not think about it and just happily try and support all those cool techs. |