I often get in arguments about how I tend to avoid brands that put too much into marketing. Of course, theoretically, the amount of money a company puts into marketing doesn't automatically lower the quality of their products, but in my experience, the correlation is there. Whiskas, Coka Cola, McDonalds, etc.
The notion that "computers are never wrong" has been engrained in society for at least a century now, starting with scifi, and spreading to the rest of culture.
It's an idea that has caused more harm than good.
We started down this path ever since obvious bugs were reframed as "hallucinations".
I thought the movie "the Creator" was pretty neat, it envisions a future where AI gets blamed for accidentally nuking Los Angeles so America bans it and reignites a kind of cold war with Asia which has embraced GAI and transcended the need for central governance. Really it's a film about war and how it can be started with a lie but continue out of real existential fear.
This is how it already is for most aspects of life that have, for many, been enshittified by progress. Sadly the shitty part is not entirely avoidable by choice.
Enshittification is all around us and is unstoppable. Because we have deadlines to hit and goals to shows we reached to the VP. We broke everything and the software is just half working? Come on that's an issue for the support and ops teams. On to the next beautiful feature we can put on marketing slides!
The typical response is "because humans are just as bad, if not worse."
But in general, the (mis-)information that spinach could contain so much iron to be interchangeable with nails had to be a typo so rare that it would become anecdotal and generate cultural phenomena like Popeye.
That is very worrying. Normally this would never fly, but nowadays it's kind of OK?
Why should false and or inaccurate results be accepted?