I was commenting on what another user said, not on the article OP posted. Not every reply in the comment section is a direct response to the topic at hand. I was talking about the definition of terms, not the stock market.

Yeah, okay, but I still don’t know how this relates to what I said.

I don’t know how this relates to what I said.

Even Grok AI follows up with that reminder when it mentions X.

Just a reminder that the term “AI” stands for a category of systems that contains a lot more than just LLMs.

Microsoft already had a proven business model and established products and services before the AI boom. If a company goes under it would almost certainly be one focused almost entirely on AI such as Palantir.

Even if we replaced every single vehicle in the US with self-driving ones that are 10x safer drivers than humans, that would still lead to 4000 people dying each year plus many more being injured. “Who is responsible” is more of an philosophical question at that point really. It doesn’t quite make sense to punish the head of Waymo for cutting down traffic deaths ten-fold. The need to have someone to blame is something humanity needs to grow out of. Just like the need to drive.

Highlighting individual cases like this is a good way to capture human emotions but the focus should be on the big picture. The moment a self driving car is statistically safer than a human driver it becomes the objectively better alternative. The fact that accidents will still keep happening nevertheless isn’t a reason to revert back to human drivers.

This same “trick” is used in charity advertisements: starving kid will capture the attention of people but a starving village will not despite the fact that it contains that same kid.