[not_your_vase]

This doesn't seem to be about improvement nor about algorithms. It's about bolting AI on top of everything (because that's the style at the time) for the sake of being able to tell that it has AI.

From marketing pov it kind of makes sense. If I think about it, if there are two otherwise equal toilet brushes, I will pick the one that has AI too.

[BriggyDwiggs42]

If the prices were comparable id take the non ai one because the manufacturing cost probably went into better materials

[karmakaze]

Cars are a good counterexample. Low-tech cars have much less troubles. Eventually full-featured ones will also be consistently reliable and secure but we're going through growing pains. Safety features that can be enabled/disabled are a good advancement though.

[drewcoo]

Software today might be more like cars in the 1950s.

Every year, cars needed to feature new, useless styling to be attractive to buyers. Cars were often replaced annually so that the neighbors could see your taller fins and space-age styling.

This also is the era when seatbelts were known to save lives but were not included in most cars.

[rolph]

out of all the things an ai proffers, i have yet see one, wash windows; swweep floors; scrub toilets; or make coffee.

if AI could do those things, seamlessly, then i would bite, other than that it looks and smells like a grift.

[rightbyte]

> If I think about it, if there are two otherwise equal toilet brushes, I will pick the one that has AI too.

Really? Will you, or do you believe other people will? (I realize toilet brush is a metaphor).