I’m pretty sure he could step down and hand it to Kamala. Maybe he could even run as VP. That might rock the boat the least, and while I don’t like Kamala, I have more faith in her to actually do the job.

Hear me out…

I think there might be a connection between poast-dot-org and poa-dot-st. The latter is a Neo-Nazi Pleroma instance. I haven’t seen any proof that the domains are connected. Might not be.

So it turns out that racially insensitive victim blaming and bootlicking is worth at least a few dozen downvotes. Congratulations?

It connected all the conspiracy weirdos too, fwiw.

What would be so bad with…

…checks notes…

…informing young people about the most horrible decisions made throughout history, why they were flawed, and how not to repeat the same mistakes today?

Hmm…

Just take a look at the world around you. That’s a fucking start…

Every time Picard asks Data a question.

Copyright infringement becomes theft when you make money off of someone else’s work, which is the goal of every one of these AI companies. I 100% mean theft.

This isn’t the USA.

Texas is, believe it or not, the USA. Since 1845 even.

I know you aren’t bright enough to separate the two

Big words from a pathetic person.

it would be like saying because the far right has made inroads in French election, then all of Europe is in the toilet.

Imagine existing in 2024 and not yet noticing the global trend towards Fascism in a world with increasing economic unfairness that’s about to experience a worldwide climate disaster that will displace a billion people, handing a massive opportunity to the far right to take control.

But no, the right wing is no big deal. Just ignore what’s happening in Texas and France (and everywhere else), it’s not important.

Look, you’re the one who set the Louvre as the standard for what is or isn’t art. If you want to keep moving the goalpost, by all means, explain what you actually think makes something art.

I’d say it is a bit more complicated than that for car doors.

Car doors work fine on every car but a Tesla. They aren’t some new technology invented by Tesla where design flaws like this are understandable. Tesla just does things so badly that they invent brand new dangers that only exist with their vehicles.

You don’t want it to fail and come open

That isn’t what “fail open” means. It doesn’t mean that the moment the battery dies all the doors fly open. It means that when the battery dies the doors aren’t latched shut like a bank safe.

At a minimum, the key should offer a way to open the car from the outside when the battery is dead. It’s completely asinine to put the only emergency latch on the inside of the car where you can’t use it, especially since it is hidden so deep most people can’t find it without the manual.

What’s controversial or unpopular about what I said?

You’re giving Elon Musk’s awful cars the benefit of a doubt by pretending that this isn’t a completely reckless design flaw that should never have existed in the first place, and you are deliberately misinterpreting what “fail open” means to make it sound like a ridiculous solution instead of the industry safety best practice that it actually is.

Also, you’re complaining about downvotes, so expect even more now I guess.

My take is that you can train AI on whatever you want for research purposes, but if you brazenly distribute models trained on other people’s content, you should be liable for theft, especially if you are profiting off of it.

Just because AI has so much potential doesn’t mean we should be reckless and abusive with it. Just because we can build a plagiarism machine capable of reproducing facsimiles of humanity doesn’t mean that how we are building that is ethical or legal.

If inclusion in the Louvre is an obligatory status to be considered art, then makeup is absolutely art.

https://presse.louvre.fr/lancome-x-louvre-1063000212057/

Nobody said anything anti-gun. This is a legitimate statistic.

If it feels anti-gun to you, it’s probably your conscience asking you if this is an acceptable side effect of unlimited gun rights. Maybe listen to that voice and think of an answer to that question.

Somebody really needs to do something about this kid.

The loss of his entire studio and all of his trademarks is going to have a huge impact on his ability to succeed moving forward. Starting a new show on a fringe platform with no budget is honestly quite desperate. His best path to success is to try to ride a wave of victimhood, and he can’t do that without once again spreading lies about the Sandy Hook families, so he either needs to find a new angle, or he’s diving headfirst into another lawsuit that he will absolutely lose.

deleted by creator

The author of the article is right not to believe this claim. The author can say that their software was intended for whatever noble uses they want. We know from experience that software has mainstream off-label use.

Is BitTorrent really a tool for downloading community content like open films and Linux distros? Because that’s what the creators say it’s for. It’s not untrue.

Is Jellyfin or Plex a tool for organizing your ripped collection of CDs, DVDs, and Blu-rays? That’s what the developers say. It’s not untrue

Is Tor a tool for protecting dissidents? That’s what they say it is. It really is that. But is that all it is?

This tool might be useful for identifying sex trafficking victims, just as a nudifying app might be useful for identifying victims of involuntary pornography.

But on the other side of this is that nudifying apps are more likely to be used to create involuntary pornography, and makeup-removal apps are more likely to be used to harass women.

No reason to ban AI technology or anything, but no reason to pretend that tools like this aren’t used for off-label and sometimes nefarious purposes.

I’ve edited people’s makeup and faces as part of the process of learning Photoshop, so I understand what you’re saying. There are perfectly normal applications for this.

The issue is intent. A lot of men think that women are “lying” when they wear makeup. They think that the most valuable quality a woman can have is natural beauty, and treat makeup as trickery.

There’s no shortage of men who think “You’d look better without makeup” is a compliment too.

An app like this would inevitably be used to help streamline the process of harassIng and negging women online.

There’s also the matter that women can put great time and effort into their makeup, and having someone remove their hard work from an image and throw it back at them is quite insulting. A makeup artist is still an artist and they likely don’t want their peers wielding tools designed specifically to nullify their work.

It shouldn’t be illegal or anything. No law against being an asshole. But it isn’t an app that will be used with good intent in most cases, and we should definitely pay attention because the “modify pictures of other people’s faces and bodies” use case for AI appears to have the potential to do a great deal of harm.