AI Good and Bad

Good or Bad?

 
Microsoft canceled its internal Claude Code licenses this week after token-based billing made the cost untenable, even for a company with effectively infinite cloud resources. Uber's CTO sent an internal memo warning the company burned through its entire 2026 AI budget in just four months. American AI software prices have jumped 20% to 37%, and GitHub (owned by Microsoft) is dropping flat-rate plans for usage-based billing across its products.

My Take
The AI subsidy era is ending in real time. The same company that put $13 billion into OpenAI and built the Azure infrastructure powering most of Anthropic's compute just looked at the bill from a competitor's coding tool and decided it was not worth paying. That is not a productivity failure on Anthropic's end. Token-based pricing is forcing every enterprise customer to confront the actual cost of running these models at scale, and the number turns out to be far higher than the flat-rate experiments suggested.


 
  • Exclamation
Reactions: mat200
This is going to get REALLY complex. Things like CREDIT are deeply reliant on individual factors that AI could do a good job in identifying potential risk. We've been down the road where people undeserving of credit were given far too much-- those situations don't end well for a lot of people.

1779654440842.png
1779654573310.png

 
AI Graduation Name Reader Fails ..

 
  • Like
Reactions: bigredfish
AI-based cheating in academia is off the charts, and represents an absolute threat to the validity of degrees

Academia made itself irrelevant decades ago, and AI had nothing to do with it whatsoever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mat200
Academia made itself irrelevant decades ago, and AI had nothing to do with it whatsoever.
While that's a nice popular bitching point about higher ed, it's inaccurate. The point is to treat a university like a VOCATIONAL school--and that's why you go there. You want to be some kind of engineer-- you need a degree in that kind of engineering. Same for teachers, counselors, social workers, psychologists, nursing at all levels, radiology/medical imaging, doctors, lawyers, and any number of other professions. You need college for certification or licensing in those jobs, and AI is impacting the fidelity of outcomes in those programs.

I'm not worried about the dumbass "Gender Studies" majors-- they will always be serving up starbucks to people. I teach university courses online as an adjunct for a Teacher Ed program-- and I have students (who will someday be teaching children) using AI to write papers every damn term. Many see it as no big deal and actually try to justify it. I take hits on course evaluations for holding the line on that shit. The same issue is happening for other instructors in programs preparing people for all of those professional jobs-- and AI is only getting better and harder to detect. About one more year of it for me and I'm done. Until then, I'll just be the asshole handing out zeros for AI bullshit slop turned in as legitimate work.
 
Ooopsss


BREAKING: MICROSOFT JUST ANNOUNCED TO BAN ITS OWN ENGINEERS FROM USING AI DUE TO THE COST OF USING IT.
VP OF NVIDIA SAID, “THE COST OF AI FOR MY TEAM WAS MORE THAN HUMANS”
“AI CAN COST MORE THAN HUMAN WORKERS NOW”


 
  • Exclamation
Reactions: mat200
Another … this is starting to snowball…


 
  • Like
Reactions: mat200
  • Exclamation
Reactions: mat200

Great post-- There IS a ceiling, and China will find it and undercut everyone else by 20%, and a massive amount of your data will be manipulated by them, not that it matters much at this point. Feels like we're building towards something, but Is it the Matrix or Terminator?

Meanwhile in my class.... <imagine the graphic of another 100% AI-generated paper discovered via AI-Detection that IPC forum error won't let me upload>

Screenshot 2026-05-26 095615.jpg
 
Last edited:

A.I. ‘Hallucinations’ Created Errors in Court Filing, Top Law Firm Says​

Sullivan & Cromwell apologized for submitting a court document that had fake citations created by artificial intelligence.

1779819202609.png

An elite Wall Street law firm has apologized to a federal judge for submitting a court filing replete with errors created by artificial intelligence, including “hallucinations” that fabricated case citations.

The A.I.-generated errors came in a recent motion in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan and were discovered by lawyers from an opposing firm, Andrew Dietderich, a partner at Sullivan & Cromwell, wrote in a letter to Judge Martin Glenn on April 18.

“We deeply regret that this has occurred,” Mr. Dietderich wrote.

The firm provided a ledger of the errors, which spanned three pages and totaled around three dozen. A number of them involved the citation of seemingly imagined passages from real cases. Some were clerical errors that the firm said were not A.I.-related.

Sullivan & Cromwell is one of the oldest and most prestigious law firms in the country. It is representing President Trump in several appeals, including his criminal conviction in 2024 in a case that stemmed from a hush-money payment to a porn star. Jay Clayton, now the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, was of counsel and formerly a partner at the firm.

The apology revealed the latest embarrassing blunder for lawyers found to have used A.I. in crafting erroneous arguments. The legal profession is undergoing a reckoning over the growing and widespread use of A.I., which is luring lawyers dealing with voluminous research even as it has a propensity to spit out legal falsehoods.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: bigredfish