TikTok, Youtube, news, blogs, … are getting flooded with AI generated content, I'd call that a pretty substantial "change in output".
I think the mistake here is expecting that AI is just making workers in older jobs faster, when the reality is, more often than not, that it changes the nature of the task itself.
Whenever AI reached the "good enough" point, it doesn't do so in a way that nicely aligns with human abilities, quite the opposite, it might be worse at performing a task, but be able to perform it 1000x faster. That allows you to do things that weren't previously possible, but it also means that professionals might not want to rely on using AI for the old tasks.
A professional translator isn't going to switch over to using AI, the quality isn't there yet, but somebody like Amazon could offer a "OCR & translate all the books" service and AI would be good enough for it, since it could handle all the books that nobody has the time and money to translate manually. Which in turn will eventually put the professional translator out of a job when it gets better than good enough. We aren't quite there yet, but getting pretty close.
In 2025 a lot of AI went from "useless, but promising" to "good enough".
> As a user, what am I supposed to do with such a popup?
Change the floppy disk. In the MSDOS days those messages were useful, as read errors might be caused by having the wrong floppy in the drive. The OS had no way to know when the floppy was changed and "Retry" allowed you to swap the disks back and try again. In modern days it is less useful, the behavior just got carried over.
Windows addresses this issue somewhat by scanning the directory tree before the actual copying starts, this can catch some errors before they happen and gives you better progress reporting on top.
But a single dialog that keeps track of the whole copy/move operations, not a modal dialog attached to individual read/write calls would be the way to go here. This is a case of the GUI sticking to close to what the OS is doing instead of what the user intended to do.
> Windows addresses this issue somewhat by scanning the directory tree before the actual copying starts
Which really sucks because no you need to wait for minutes before it actually starts moving or deleting. I generally just abort, start the midnight commander or just invoke mv/del directly.
> But a single dialog that keeps track of the whole copy/move operations
Which is what is the case here? The question and buttons appear in that dialog.
The error/retry dialog is for the failure of moving an individual file, not for a failure of the move operation as a whole. Those individual error dialogs provide no means to deal with cascading errors. All you can do is "Skip All", but that means you get no further information on errors anymore.
The error reporting should be part of the Moving dialog itself and provide a list of everything that failed in the move, along with potential ways to resolve it. More detailed reporting than "Could not read" would also be welcome (io, permission, ...).
That's something C2PA[1] might be able to help with, i.e. your phones camera puts a digital signature on the photo confirming that your phone took it. If that doesn't work out due to people photographing an AI image of a display, I would expect custom shop apps to be required to make warranty claims, as they could make use of all the phones sensors and make forging much harder.
Either way, I am not sure how big of a problem this is to begin with, since you'd leave quite the paper trail either way. It's not a stunt you can pull off repeatedly without getting caught.
No, the games just disappear from the shop and can no longer be bought via Steam. When you are already own them, you keep them. Third party seller might sometimes also still sell remaining Steam Key inventory and thus offer a way to activate a delisted game on Steam.
One area where content can disappear is music licenses, those often don't result in a complete delisting of the game, but just the music getting patched out of the game. In those cases, the music would be gone for everybody, as Steam game updates are mandatory and you can't downgrade the game to a previous version either. Unofficial mods will sometimes address this issue and add the music back in.
> Steam game updates are mandatory and you can't downgrade the game to a previous version either.
For Crusader Kings III, the old versions are listed as betas (cog -> properties -> betas) so you downgrade by "signing up to a beta".
I don't know if it's a common practice but pretty damn necessary for paradox games. A single game might take months and their attitude to backwards compatibility is "new versions will corrupt your game files in ways that only subtly reveal themselves like noticing the King of England owns a county in Mongolia before reaching a game year that will always crash".
Why is Tor making it so difficult to change the region/ExitNode then? Geo-Blocking is by far the most prevalent form of online censorship and while Tor can work around it, it requires fiddling with config files and restarting the service instead of clicking a button.
When it comes to small focused OSS tools, you can basically code them at the speed of thought with modern LLMs. The slow part is figuring out what you want to do in the first place, the implementing is basically instantaneous. It's literally faster than googling a tool that already does the job.
And yes, that doesn't scale to all problem domains or problem sizes, but in some areas even a 20x speedup would be a huge understatement.
Or from a users perspective: Why bother looking for software that fits your purpose, when you can just let the AI write one from scratch that does?
A lot of what makes software complicated is that it has to serve thousands of users with different requirements at once. With AI on the other side, that's not something a user has to worry about, they can just let the AI spawn a much smaller special purpose tool that solves exactly the problem they are having.
We might be entering the age of disposable software, where software isn't a product, but just something your AI system produces temporarily in the background for the task at hand.
For example, you tell the AI you're looking to buy an apartment, show some options.
It'll spin up an interactive map with layers of prices, amenities, etc.
Ask it to warp the map projection to show walk-times to metro stations, and it's do that.
Ask it to add some sliders for price range, walk-distance, 'social class', etc.
Ask to book viewings and it'll spin up a calendar, and web form (if it needs more information from you), and then send emails or fill agency booking forms with that data.
All highly personalized, created for the moment, and potentially disposable.
Might be correct for reasonably narrow definitions of language and thought, but it falls a bit short in considering the extended mind thesis. A whole lot of our thinking happens with pen&paper, their digital successor or other items out there in the world. We don't solve complex problems in our head alone, we solve them by interacting iteratively with the real world, and that in turn often involves some kind of language, even if it's just us reading our own scribbles.
Another issue is that a lot of tasks in the modern world are rooted in language, law or philosophy is in large part just word games, you won't be able to get far thinking about them without language, as those concept don't have any direct correlate that you could experience by other means.
Overall I do agree that there are plenty of problems we can solve without language, but the type of problems that can and can't be solve without language would need some further delineation.
While I agree we do a lot of our problem solving with symbolic languages (streams of images), even if we define "thought" as symbolic language processing, I believe many great experts in philosophy and law do internalize the relationships between concepts and operate on it on a more subconscious level to get there faster, going back to the symbolic language to validate their reasoning processes.
I wouldn't call those underlying processes "thinking", but it is a matter of definition.
This is also why those who just use LLMs to write those court submissions we've read about fail: there was no non-thinking reasoning happening, but just a stream of words coming out, and then you need to validate everything, which is hard, time-consuming and... boring.
I think the mistake here is expecting that AI is just making workers in older jobs faster, when the reality is, more often than not, that it changes the nature of the task itself.
Whenever AI reached the "good enough" point, it doesn't do so in a way that nicely aligns with human abilities, quite the opposite, it might be worse at performing a task, but be able to perform it 1000x faster. That allows you to do things that weren't previously possible, but it also means that professionals might not want to rely on using AI for the old tasks.
A professional translator isn't going to switch over to using AI, the quality isn't there yet, but somebody like Amazon could offer a "OCR & translate all the books" service and AI would be good enough for it, since it could handle all the books that nobody has the time and money to translate manually. Which in turn will eventually put the professional translator out of a job when it gets better than good enough. We aren't quite there yet, but getting pretty close.
In 2025 a lot of AI went from "useless, but promising" to "good enough".
reply