molave

Because the plan all along is generational theft.

Think you’re right lol

Not necessarily “out of sand”. IP is basically putting a price tag on a person for them to say “Yes, I consent”. In other words, technofeudalism.

Do you want to read paywalled news but want to bypass the paywall? It’s similar. Only difference is depending on who you ask, they like one and dislike the other—or it’s like punching up or down.

Socialistic polices get a bad rap because of the cold war-era communist=atheist association. Theoretically, you can reframe vast social safety nets by the government as citizens (read: also Christians) coordinating charity to be distributed more effectively. This is a bottom-up approach that has the common person’s buy-in. The reasonable criticism of the same policies lies in the top-down, legislation by fiat enactment of policy. No different than, let’s say, Netflix arbitrarily raising their prices without your input.

Maybe, part of your job is to not touch anything in a random day and observe what happens when something breaks. That way, you can document what’s not being fixed so that your team is more prepared when you’re actually not there.

The Strongest Shooter in History versus the Strongest Shooter of Today

Crowd Strike’s Final Fantasy

They stop breaches if nothing’s turned on. Roll safe (mode)

The hyperbole is the point. They’re explaining that such a thing is theoretically possible.

Alternate source

Looks more like a legislative skill issue than a judicial one to me. I don’t know what is expected of the judges aside from interpreting the law.

How about Australian cryptids?

I’m very wary of the measures that could potentially pass if the some of the anti-AI art people get their way. I know how messy and difficult putting fair-use material in YouTube can be. There would be more of that in more platforms.

I agree unregulated AI is problematic. At the same time, I’m cynical on what the actual measures would look like.

I get that using and promoting labels for your group promote solidarity. It can also cause division simply because when you call yourself “X”, it’s inevitable that people would form opinions and at worst prejudices on what is “not X”.

My point? Similar policies may result in different outcomes.

This measure in a vacuum is not inherently bad, though it is authoritarian and, yes, contrary to a Republican’s (theoretical) advocacy to small government. Rwanda also removed legal distinctions between Tutsi and Hutu, but it was done after and because of the genocide.

Their names

I gonna say his name…

He’s Heisenberg

Your chemistry teacher is not in danger, he is the danger.