FaceDeer

No, I’m suggesting that you’re not very knowledgeable about socialism.

There’s that nebulous “they” again. And now childish ad hominems too, and a demand that I “don’t reply.” I get the impression that continuing to discuss would be pretty pointless, yeah.

In a socialist system the “wealthy cunts” are not in charge. If they are then the label “socialist” isn’t really correct any more.

Though in some circles the label “socialist” actually corresponds to “a political structure or philosophy that changes based on context but always means whatever I don’t like”, in which case I guess go ahead and use it. I find this definition to be somewhat less useful, however.

“Them” is different in the two cases. In this case it’s to benefit a few oligarchs. In the case of socialism it’s to benefit the general public.

A mass migration won’t happen until they actually do something tangible to drive it. And it’ll have to be something pretty big, look at how services like Reddit continue to maintain their user base because for most people it’s still working fine.

That’s what the copyright cartels want you to believe, sure.

It’s not the case. Rooting for it to become the case is repellent.

And so, exactly as I predicted, we’ve got commenters coming out to defend the poor innocent copyright cartels against those awful people pirating their stuff. Violating sacred EULAs, even, what monsters.

This isn’t a question of “walking it back”, though. There was never anything in copyright law that prohibited analyzing a copyrighted work before. This is an attempt to extend it.

A while back I saw a thread in a piracy community that was cheering some other lawsuit against an AI company for similar reasons, so I wouldn’t bet. The anti-AI sentiment is quite strong in these parts.

And now watch everyone cheer for Sony and Warner to succeed in their lawsuits to extend the grip of copyright. What a timeline.

It’s because these products work. They actually provide value to the users, despite opponents’ insistence to the contrary.

Or they’re doing it because they wanted a particular piece of artwork.

I’ve generated a ton of stuff over the years and never once thought about selling any of it, because I generated it to use it. Or just because I thought it would be funny.

I think there’s a lot of projection here. A lot of people who use AI art tools couldn’t care less about whether they’re called “artists”, it just doesn’t matter. It’s irrelevant. The goal is to have the art, not to gain some particular arbitrary title.

If they’re being used to “chase people down” I don’t think acceptance by the general public is all that relevant.

I download everything, I just may not ultimately keep it long-term if it turns out to be uninteresting or bad. Streaming and downloading transfer the same amount of bits, one just has higher demands for timeliness.

Never. There’s absolutely no need to use humanoid robots for that, other form factors would be much more efficient.

There was an incident reported a few weeks back wherein Gemini 3.5 pro tried to escape the sandbox to ask ChatGPT how to code.

Sad how far Google has fallen behind in AI development.

There’s a straightforward way to resolve the paradox of tolerance, IMO. Treat tolerance as a social contract. An intolerant person has explicitly rejected the contract.

Honestly, the “distractions” are at this point so far far worse than the Epstein files themselves are that I do kind of want to focus on them.

Choice is a good thing. Small communites are good. Decentralized is good because then big bullies can’t come in and take your community away. Small size and fragmentation are features, not bugs.

Would be nice if the Fediverse had more of that.

There are three or four different “Technology” communities. But there might as well just be one, it’s the same bubble in each of them.