echodot

Quite frankly it's disgusting. That's why I only eat food that has lots of healthy e numbers, MSG, and added sugar. As God intended.

I feel like the daily mail is worse. People know the star is full of shit, so don't take it seriously. Whereas some people seem to have a perception of the daily mail that it's somewhat reputable newspaper.

So maybe the world needs less cocaine, not more.

Woh there with your hot take

Yeah but it's also the daily mail who are reporting this so default assumptions.

It might be possible to get into output wirelessly, it has a dedicated radio for video output so presumably if you just stuck an adaptor into your TV you could just cast to it. Could be quite a nice setup if you wanted it to be able to connect to both your computer in the study and your TV in the living room.

Oh yeah, and and they would mostly be terrible, except one brand no one has ever heard of but, it's apparently a big name in China, and called something like Zloks would inexplicably be the king of that particular niche product.

I hate the Wi-Fi remote thing. My TV has a Wi-Fi remote and it runs off of AA battery and they last about 4 days and then run out. If I hadn't replaced them with rechargeable ones they would have probably had to open a new landfill site just for my old batteries.

As much as I agree I think it would have been a bad move for them to do that. The devices success is already highly dependant on its price, which is still in flux as far as I understand, there is no reason for them to make the decision even more difficult.

It's got DP as well though so it's not all that bad. We really should be pushing manufacturers over to DP anyway.

It's literally the same feature set.

Well I used to go to Vegas quite often for conferences and now that's stopped because apparently no one else wants to go either. I think they are having it in Leeds this year, which is quite the downgrade let me tell you.

Better food though.

I do not understand how people at these advertising agencies are so bad at their actual jobs.

I used to work in an advertising agency, the job is done by humans who go home and watch TV and play video games and generally interact with the rest of the human race on a fairly regular basis. There's no way in hell that they failed to register the public's dissatisfaction with AI. So how do they then sit in a pitch meeting and recommend its use?

I guarantee what happened here is that McDonald's wanted things to be cheap and so wanted to use AI, and the advertising agency just wanted to get McDonald's business so didn't push back on it as hard as they should have done. And look it's now done damage to their brand. They better come out with a statement real quick to clarify that it was McDonald's decision and not theirs, otherwise clients are going to be concerned that they're trying to cut corners.

Part of the job is to tell clients when they're being unreasonable. There was a property developer that we worked with a lot and he was always trying to get us to do deceptive things such as using CGI shots of his housing estate rather than the actual shots because the properties didn't look anything like what was being depicted in the CGI shots. I'm sure if we were doing it today he would be trying to use AI as well. Fortunately my boss was always able to talk him out of these decisions pointing out that it would simply result in him getting a reputation for dishonesty, and would in the long term hurt him.

Animals would be preferable. I reckon a chipmunk would be able to understand the instructions, it's only humans that fuck it up that bad.

Because who else would raise a support ticket because the first name field doesn't allow emoji? Or ask for a Braille language option, it's still English Karen, it's basically just a font, and there's no point anyway without a braille output, just putting the dots on the screen isn't helpful. That one got closed as it "won't fix" since there's no one in the organisation who's blind and it's mostly a hardware problem anyway.