I'd be fine with the downvotes if they were used as you described, but as there is no realistic way to stop people using them as an "I disagree/I don't like that" button which is in reality the way they are mostly used. I think we'd be better without.
Though that's not really the point of your post is it? What you did was read and understand OP correctly but then thought, "won't it be so hilarious if I make a joke and answered with something that you LITERALLY can't live with out, instead of contributing to the discussion!?!?! Hahaha delightfully devilish, professorozone!"
That your comment is upvoted is disappointing. It's Reddit tier crap.
Most people wouldn't consider a cup of tea to be luxurious at all. But if tea was scarce and you only got one cup a year, it would seem absolutely amazing, a special occasion and you'd really savour the experience.
There's definitely something to be said for luxury which is much more about rarity or restriction rather than the experience itself.
I often think the place would be better with no downvotes.
If you think a post/comment is good, then upvote. If you think a post/comment is bad, then either get over it and move on or grow a pair and say why.
The freedom of expression means that you have to read/hear/see things that you might not like every now and again, but I'd much rather that than end up in another echo chamber.
I don't think that not wanting enshittification of Cadbury's mean you have a "really cool and deep personality".
It's not about hating popular things, it's about hating shrinkflation. I for one would happily pay a little more rather than have the products I love become so shit that I don't want to buy them anyway, which is the only real power you have as a consumer.
Cream eggs are case in point. Not only are they smaller now, but the ingredients are shitter quality and it shows.
If the US economy tanks, that will have knock on effects around the world. It's by far the world's largest economy and pretty much anyone with any investments at all is going to be invested in the US.
And Trump, whilst very deserving of much of the criticism put forth, will absolutely put America first.
It doesn’t necessarily contradict but adds nuance to the conversation. LLMs shine in areas like logistics, data analysis, and workflow automation, despite their role in direct robotic control or real-time precision tasks is limited.
Where the confusion might arise is that while LLMs can contribute to robotics—like interpreting natural language commands or generating code—they aren’t a substitute for core movement algorithms like inverse kinematics. In other words, LLMs enhance certain aspects around robotics and automation but don't replace the specialized systems already in place for critical tasks.
The focus is more on integration and augmentation, not replacement.
Imagine looking at biplanes in the twenties, only pointing out the flaws, unable to imagine the huge improvements in flight technology that are to come over the next few decades.
There's absolutely no reason to think that AI won't improve in the same way almost any other new technology has over time.
Will there be peaks and dips along the way? Sure, but progress is almost inevitable.
I think this comment misses the mark on a few points. Let me break it down.
First off, LLMs aren’t meant to physically replace warehouse pickers and packers – that’s not the point. What they can do is supercharge the automation we already have. LLMs can manage logistics, predict inventory, optimize warehouse layouts, and even coordinate robotic systems more efficiently. So while the robots might be doing the heavy lifting, LLMs are the brains that help them work smarter and faster.
Now, about this idea that 30-year-old robotics have already made pickers obsolete – that's not quite right. Sure, we’ve had robots for decades, but the tech has come a long way since then. Early automation was clunky and limited, but modern robots? They’ve got AI-driven vision, flexible grippers, and adaptive systems that let them handle all kinds of tasks, even things as precise as packing odd-shaped items. Amazon, for example, already uses AI-powered robotic arms in their warehouses, and they’re getting better every year.
As for precision – I get why you’d think LLMs aren’t up to that, but they actually play a huge role in making robots more precise. LLMs can process sensor data, adjust algorithms on the fly, and help robots fine-tune their movements. It’s not about replacing humans directly – it’s about helping robots learn and adapt faster.
The Ford and GM example is interesting, but it’s a bit outdated. Sure, back in the 80s and 90s, machinists could outperform the robots, but that’s not the case anymore. Tesla’s Gigafactories, Amazon’s fulfillment centers – modern automation often outpaces human workers now, both in speed and accuracy. The human role is shifting more towards overseeing and maintaining these systems, rather than competing with them directly.
And let’s not forget – warehousing is one of the fastest sectors to automate right now. E-commerce giants are investing heavily in robotic solutions to pick, pack, and sort, and LLMs are driving that forward by managing and optimizing the whole process. The more we lean into AI and automation, the less we need manual labor in these environments.
So yeah, LLMs aren’t coming for warehouse jobs by themselves – but they’re definitely helping push automation to a level where fewer humans are needed. It’s not a far-off future, it’s already happening.
I used the spinning jenny because it is a classic example of a new technology that workers hated at the time and actively tried to destroy but the descendants of which are now considered the standard way to produce threads.
It wasn't a simple machine back then, it was revolutionary.
I'd be fine with the downvotes if they were used as you described, but as there is no realistic way to stop people using them as an "I disagree/I don't like that" button which is in reality the way they are mostly used. I think we'd be better without.