deaux

3 ms·

31.
by deaux 28d ago
> "But they can't possibly review every ad before publishing" they say. If that's the case It's not, it never is; it's a lie on the level of "Poland attacked first". Say, if someone was offering yo
32.
by deaux 28d ago
> The fact that we're allowing companies to get away with bullshit like this is ludicrous to me Hope you're not voting for any parties that don't explicitly run on a platform of stopping companies getting away with bullshi
33.
by deaux 28d ago
No. These companies have correctly figured out that it's much cheaper to buy out governments so they won't actually punish them for all the regulations they break or institute new such regulations. That's the weird timeline w
34.
by deaux 28d ago
> This is the key to the problem that I think people are missing, possibly because they kind of want to miss it. Google and the other companies hiding behind LLMs and primarily doing it because they can't operate at the scale they d
35.
by deaux 28d ago
> How are your rights being violated? Surveillance capitalism. > I'm sure you have a solid and thought-out answer that justifies such a casual attitude towards violence. The ones with a casual attitude towards violence are those
36.
by deaux 28d ago
What's your point? If someone murders your family in cold blood "with an ideal" and they "see themselves as good", for example because they believe your family consists of infidels, does that make a difference? In a
37.
by deaux 28d ago
Any reasonable person would interpret the original comment as the "generic you" rather than the "second person you", but nice save.
38.
by deaux 29d ago
> write an English paragraph that doesn't make me want to claw my eyes out. LLMs are very much capable of that. Your belief in the opposite has two causes. Firstly the toupee fallacy. You don't notice LLM written text that does
39.
by deaux 29d ago
Right, I assume tomorrow you'll be applying for the next Nazi camp guard vacancy? After all, if you don't do it, someone with less scruples likely will.
40.
by deaux 29d ago
> most scientists working on this really want to see and experience it. We used to call these people doomsday cultists and made sure to ostracize them from society.
41.
by deaux 29d ago
If I don't get accepted into art school, I might as well exterminate a few ethnicities. Actually, yours seems worse. Bringing about "the end of all professions" sounds like you're talking about ending humanity.
42.
by deaux 29d ago
Explain why? How does live being worth living binarily depend on having a cushy software job?
43.
by deaux 1mo ago
> You can't just commit crimes on the open internet without really hiding IPs and what not, and expect that to not come back to haunt you eventually. Not sure what you're talking about, the current AI boom is entirely based on
44.
by deaux 1mo ago
This too isn't true. Most of the services you listed only operate in one (or at most a small few) countries. I know for a fact that in some of them, Uber is not the highest price. Instead, in some of them, Uber and the ones you liste
45.
by deaux 1mo ago
A good majority of the Americans want Epstein's best buddies' jailed, instead the POTUS is one.
46.
by deaux 1mo ago
> by saying things like terrorism is in the eye of the beholder This is so trivially true that it's not worth bringing up in discussoon with anyone who can be taken seriously. It's true for any politically charged word, and ter
47.
by deaux 1mo ago
> Seems like the best way around this is... don't do business with terrorists? Do you do any business with the US government? Potentially even supporting them financially through taxes? Why are you doing business with terrorists?
48.
by deaux 1mo ago
In EU countries with independent court systems, those EU governments routinely ignore court decisions they don't like. I did a very deep dive into this. There is no European country where checks and balances consistently, properly work
49.
by deaux 1mo ago
FYI the ones you named include ones priced exactly the same as Uber. Uber doesn't take the same cut in every country.
50.
by deaux 1mo ago
OpenAI had such a disaster themselves before, GPT-4, so they replaced it with 4o.
51.
by deaux 1mo ago
> Not a theory. It's literally the law. It is not, which is why you've failed to show that law, or indeed any cases in the last 50 years of companies having been successfully sued for such a thing. It's honestly so obvious
52.
by deaux 1mo ago
They aren't, and as such, deciding to forego short-term profit by making sustainable decisions and practices is of course not illegal whatsoever, nor does any company ever get sued for it.
53.
by deaux 1mo ago
This is absolutely not true. Your link is focused on the UK, the "interests of the company" are independent of "the interests of shareholders", and the duties/breaches listed there revolve around betraying the compa
54.
by deaux 1mo ago
We're now entering complete FUD territory. Firstly your link is aimed at the UK. This thread started about Google and talked about the US. But hey, let's imagine it's focused on the US. Let me quote what you were claiming: &g
55.
by deaux 1mo ago
> I personally actively filter out companies who don't use Slack. The way communication is done in a company reflects practically every company decision. (Conway's Law) Do you actually mean "don't use Slack" or a
56.
by deaux 1mo ago
No , you're spreading misinformation [0]. The company's board does not have a legal obligation to "act in the interest of stockholders regardless of moral impact" in any meaningful manner. Anything, including "posit
57.
by deaux 1mo ago
There are tens of thousands of those, yes. Pretending these don't exist, edgy nihilism much?
58.
by deaux 1mo ago
Strictly speaking, no. If you're going to play semantics, you first need to define how "unintended" is "unintended". If I drive down the highway at 200mph and get someone killed, is this unintentional? Now what if I
59.
by deaux 1mo ago
You're not suggesting that most, if not all of these, are things the US hasn't done, are you? Surely not. The one you might try and dispute is the "50,000 protestors" one, as you know the other ones are clear as day.
60.
by deaux 1mo ago
> I think its likely they do have sympathy for violent groups The US regime is an extremely violent group, so I that's certainly the issue.

More ›