[xemoka]

I'll be no longer using or recommending Perplexity. This behaviour is unacceptable.

It's one thing to make it an eventual goal to replace workers with AI, it's another to step in and say "hey, our AI can be your labour" when there is a labour dispute in progress. Saying nothing was the correct response, or even "if AI was your labour, this wouldn't happen". But to offer to replace a striking workforce is super shitty.

[JumpCrisscross]

> when there is a labour dispute in progress

The Times is suing Perplexity. This is a publicity stunt. From the looks of it a damn successful one.

[Loughla]

Publicity stunt or not, this tells me everything I need to know about this company.

[apwell23]

> From the looks of it a damn successful one.

Not sure what makes this 'successful

[dimava]

> Though TechCrunch asked Perplexity for comment, Srinivas responded to TechCrunch’s post on X saying that “the offer was not to ‘replace’ journalists or engineers with AI but to provide technical infra support on a high-traffic day.” The striking workers in question, however, are the ones who provide that service to the NYT. It’s not really clear what services other than AI tools Perplexity could offer, or why they would not amount to replacing the workers in question. (However, in response to the clarification, we have opted to change the headline to reflect the claim that this offer was not necessarily specific to AI services.)

[Yizahi]

But what if they rebrand into Anthropic or Humane? Won't it change everything, signifying how they care about lowly humanses :)

[ConspiracyFact]

It’s one thing to have a goal, and another thing to take concrete action in line with that goal…?