To get to the other side.

It’s not clear that “review” here means that the original solution by the system was different from the human solution. Perhaps 350 out of 700 were identical, I can’t say, but it’s certainly not true that the entire system was just humans watching video feeds, and that’s the claim I’m disputing.

I see that Amazon Go nonsense parroted a lot here on Lemmy. It’s not true.

Humans are involved in resolving issues (like self-driving cars that get stuck), and training, but it’s not just a bunch of people watching cameras and updating a spreadsheet of your groceries.

The Verge has an article on the subject.

POITROAE

Sensitive Content Warnings doesn’t allow Google access to the contents of your images, nor does Google know that nudity may have been detected

I’m not sure I 100% believe that. Or if it’s true now, I’m not confident it will remain so.

Maybe if you’re rude to more people you can fix everything.

That recruiter might work somewhere less shit in the future, so I’d rather not burn a bridge unnecessarily.

I’ve been job hunting for 3 months. Hardly any recruiters are reaching out, and my applications go nowhere. A recruiter from xAI reached out the other day, and I couldn’t bring myself to even apply. I told them I wasn’t interested without specifying why, but it’s Elon.

Do you have a replacement in mind already?

I worked at Amazon for 8 years. That’s not how it works.

But the technology does actually work.

You don’t come up with an idea, announce it to the world, and then start figuring out how to implement it.

That’s not true at all. I personally know a person who worked on that technology.

Human beings got involved only when necessary. Do you really think Amazon wants to pay humans to be cashiers?

I admire your patience. :-D

Compelling argument.

You’ve made a compelling case against yourself.

Who?

Yeah, better save battery at the time it’s most likely to be charged/charging. :-/

Maybe I’m being overly paranoid (this is Lemmy, after all), but doesn’t this seem like a step toward something troubling?

1. Almost all of our devices are designed to use WiFi. Just try finding a laptop with an ethernet port, or a phone or tablet with wired connectivity. You can get adapters, sure, but they’re not standard anymore. I wouldn’t be surprised if game consoles eventually drop wired options altogether, or charge extra for them—like Sony does with the PS5 disc drive.
2. ISPs have a track record of trying to control our internet experience—remember the fight over net neutrality? They’re always looking for ways to monetize data and restrict what we can access online.
3. With long-range WiFi on the horizon, ISPs might find it cheaper to install one powerful broadcast device per neighborhood, similar to how 5G towers are deployed.
4. And when that happens, it’s not that features like fiber to the home or port forwarding are gone, but they could be locked behind an extra fee. Want direct access to your own network settings? That might come at a premium. Even access to certain websites could become conditional on paying more, or worse, dictated by someone else’s agenda.

• oceanclub
• thestack
• blocksandfiles
• trendforce

Just attempting to format those in a more readable way.

Oh, now I understand why the post is phrased how it is.