I knew it was coming; it was clear from the beginning that AI would have to be charged for. The massive efforts made by Microsoft on Copilot, and Google on Gemini, and similarly with the other players, would all at some point need to produce an income stream. Now, after two and a half years, when many of us have experienced the handiness and advantages of AI and are to some extent hooked on it, it is going to be charged for.
As I said, I knew this was round the corner. Surely we all did. Even so, it was a surprise the other day, when I saw that the Copilot icon on my phone had turned grey, and was relabelled 'Copilot (Legacy)'. It still worked the same, at least for my needs - I was researching watches and watch straps at the time - but it felt as if Microsoft had acted rather sneakily. Suddenly the version of Copilot I knew was to have no further development. And anyone using Copilot for something more complex would have to pay. All done suddenly at the end of September, without any great announcement.
And now Google are going to do the same. At least they have given some prior warning, albeit a few days only, although I haven't yet received any email from them about making Gemini a subscription service.
Concerned, I fired up Gemini, described my typical usage - such as advice on product best-buys, and advice on how to fix things - and asked whether 'free' Gemini would still be the right version for me. And Gemini actually said yes: the free version would be perfectly fine. So no change! Gemini added that if I ever needed to do more heavyweight stuff, like condensing and summarising large documents, or coding, then I'd need to upgrade and pay for it. But I'm absolutely certain that I won't need to do that.
So, at least for the time being, Copilot and Gemini will carry on being free to use, at least for undemanding users like me. And as they are both very useful, and kind of complement each other, this is good.
I have a feeling however that within a few years there will be a charge even for these basic versions. Or they will scrap them. Then what? Could someone like me get by without AI?
Probably yes. After all, we all used the Internet 'manually' for some twenty-five years without AI assistance. It was a bit hit-or-miss, and time-consuming - even the current 'free' versions of AI can find good relevant information in a flash. But given enough leisure, one could (and still can) get by without AI's speed.
And there's something else. An old-fashioned 'manual' search for information or advice can be very, very nuanced. I've noticed that both Copilot and Gemini sometimes misunderstand what I want to know, and don't always dig deep enough. Nor is what they tell me always correct, as I might know from my own personal knowledge. Generally speaking, they are raiding various top-level sources on the Internet, and not all of those will be free of over-enthusiasm, bias, factual mistakes or outright misinformation. And AI engines try so hard to please and not offend, to deliver what they think you want. So the results always need to be carefully considered for credibility and balance.
It always comes back to one's personal sense of what seems likely or trustworthy. That 'gut feeling'.
Logically, then, I'd be more inclined to believe an android, an artificial human, who was self-aware. They'd have a personal stake in getting things right, and keeping themselves (and me) safe from harm and undeluded by falsehoods.
%20Mustard%20Yellow%20strap%20ordered%20from%20WatchGecko.jpg)
%20Citizen%20Promaster%20Tough.jpg)
%20Citizen%20Promaster%20Tough.jpg)
%20Citizen%20Promaster%20Tough.jpg)
%20Citizen%20Promaster%20Tough.jpg)


