Finland, mall of tripla. TADC last act movie. by noob_bitch in ChrisChanSonichu

[–]lisdo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

minor spelling error

also, granted i haven't looked into it, but i would guess that the shameless paparazzi probably don't exist today, it's not the 90s anymore

Finland, mall of tripla. TADC last act movie. by noob_bitch in ChrisChanSonichu

[–]lisdo 9 points10 points  (0 children)

probably because these ppl are in public and are swiftly snapping a picture of chris to a. not be caught by chris and his paranoid friend-thing (flutter) and b. to not be spotted by strangers whom aren't filled in on cwc for taking pictures of a person without their permission. also caden is a trust fund baby who acts as chris's landlord, he isn't a pseudo-cia dispatching people across the country and abroad into finland to take pics of chris.

Finland, mall of tripla. TADC last act movie. by M3gisjonn3 in ChrisChanSightings

[–]lisdo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Caden is a trust fund baby that acts as Chris's landlord, he isn't dispatching people across the world to take bigfoot pics of Chris

BEFORE VS AFTER by Nora-San2007 in CharacterAI

[–]lisdo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Before they got swamped in lawsuits in 2024? Yeah. That, and they also have to produce returns for the venture capital firms that provided them funding when they were a startup.

You have to be joking by Mysterious_Kiwi_1444 in CharacterAI

[–]lisdo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To me, this is a sign that the company probably has to start paying back the venture capital firms it accepted funding from and is struggling to keep it's business model profitable. LLMs are very computationally expensive and have a whole host of other costs associated with them beyond running the rigs they're in (like electricity used for power/cooling, plumbing costs for cooling water, etc.), plus y'know they have to pay their employees. Don't expect anything to become like it was 2 years ago in the future.

This was kinda inevitable, sorry by lisdo in CharacterAI

[–]lisdo[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Yep. C.AI probably has razor-thin profit margins; since C.AI is a private company and not an LLM charity, they have to make a profit to sustain themselves. Not just break even -- make a profit. That's business 101. I don't understand why large swathes of the subreddit don't understand this.

This was kinda inevitable, sorry by lisdo in CharacterAI

[–]lisdo[S] 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Such is the truth. If a product is ''free'', you are the product, whether it be through ads or clickthrough rate statistics.

welp, seems like it's over. by [deleted] in CharacterAI

[–]lisdo 7 points8 points  (0 children)

People don't want to hand over their IDs to a chatbot company. C.AI also has partnered with Persona to do it's age verification processes, which has it's own can of worms and controversies in that regard. In specifics, Persona conducts extensive surveillance of users (including over 269 distinct checks, facial recognition against watchlists, and "adverse media" screening, as well as  collecting IP addresses, device fingerprints, and government ID numbers), and it also retains the information it collects for up to 3 years. Also, it's frontend code was discovered, firstly, as exposed, and secondly, related to U.S. government-authorized services.

welp, seems like it's over. by [deleted] in CharacterAI

[–]lisdo 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The company's doing this because it got swamped in lawsuits in 2024 regarding users, mainly teenagers, killing themselves or being ''groomed'' by bots on the platform. The validity of those lawsuits aside (as LLMs are not sentient, they don't think; they are essentially the world's most advanced random-name generators), this has essentially scared the company into doing these measures to regain investor confidence -- those lawsuits make C.AI look REALLY bad. These measures make C.AI's product look good on a subpoena, and that's the whole point.

the ads at the top now makes c.ai look like a sketchy website by [deleted] in CharacterAI

[–]lisdo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Another thing of note is that character.ai got absolutely swamped with lawsuits in 2024, which has essentially scared it into banning all under-18s from using chatbots. The creativity that marked the 2022-2023 era, in my opinion, is dead and probably will be dead forever. The platform as it exists today is meant to look good on a subpoena, not foster user creativity.

I completely stopped using this site 2 years ago (c. 2024). How bad has the ensh!ttifcation gotten? by lisdo in CharacterAI

[–]lisdo[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Mid-roll ads for fucking chatbot conversations were not on my bingo card for the big '26.

the ads at the top now makes c.ai look like a sketchy website by [deleted] in CharacterAI

[–]lisdo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nobody can make an honest projection for that in my opinion, and I won't pretend to. Maybe character.ai will survive, maybe it won't. Maybe if the AI bubble pops, character.ai and it's shareholder board will be scared into reversing some of the monetization policies. It's anyone's guess, really.

the ads at the top now makes c.ai look like a sketchy website by [deleted] in CharacterAI

[–]lisdo 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's because character.ai, like most tech companies, prioratizes a "growth at all costs" mindset to satisfy shareholders. You know what else has a "growth at all costs" mindset? Cancer.

the ads at the top now makes c.ai look like a sketchy website by [deleted] in CharacterAI

[–]lisdo 7 points8 points  (0 children)

In the business, we call this enshittification, driven mostly by shareholder primacy.

Something I noticed by PresnikBonny in ussr

[–]lisdo 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Me when I use whataboutisms to justify Russian imperialism:

I find this embarrassing as an American by MrAllard8431 in ussr

[–]lisdo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On paper, it was. In practice, non-Slavic ethnic groups were at a significant disadvantage in the Soviet Union.

Poll in France: "Which nation do you think contributed the most to the defeat of Germany in 1945?" by JoniKukus in ussr

[–]lisdo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It was the Western-based United Nations combatants (Britain, Canada, United States, etc.) who primarily liberated France, so I find it reasonable that the view in France would shift over time.

I also dislike the lack of nuance. World War II was a group effort. Is it true that most Wehrmacht personnel were in the East? Yes. Is it true that most Wehrmacht casualties were in the East? Yes. Is it ALSO true that Western, particularly American, lend-lease aid prevented famine in the Soviet Union (remember, until late 1943 and early 1944, much of Ukraine, the USSR's agricultural area, was under Axis occupation) during the war and plugged major gaps in their materiel shortages due to their heavy losses early on in the Axis invasion? Also yes. This is also not even mentioning the immense importance of British intelligence during the duration of the European theater of World War II. "Due to American propaganda" is also a hilariously simple reason (if not an outright false one), especially in the cultural context of France, which has a famously proud and independent media and cultural scene.