get a grip lmao
40 karma · joined January 24, 2023
get a grip lmao
Citation needed
I get to avail myself of their product for free
Because "they" will attack you economically by psychologically targetting you with advertising for items you don't actually need, but they will manipulate you into thinking you do.
Meaningless buzzwords, nobody is being 'economically attacked'
>Because "they" create an electronic copy of you with all this data. With AI and other existing / future technologies they could create a version of you to populate their metaverse.
Slippery slope fallacy. Does not exist
>"They" sell the electronic copy of you, and this can be bought by anyone, including governments. If the government of the day (which may change - boy howdy) don't like things you say or how you conduct yourself (or re-define what fraud anbd corruption means), then they can target and harass you much more specifically when armed with all this extra information that's extracted from your electronic trails.
>Another slippery slope argument.
How many times does this need to be debunked?
Conveniently you selected pre-technology examples. How curious.
Meanwhile the impending global famine(s) - (plural) of the 20th century never came to be because captitalism kept pumping out agriscience improvements to improve crop yields to 10 times what they were in 1900.
also it is nearly impossible to fire anyone in Japan for anything
Kicking off with a logical fallacy, strong start.
>There is "change", sure - the chip is now every so slightly faster, it can do "AI things", it can take slightly better photos, etc.
Just say you're technologically uninformed.
>But any comparison of these changes with the previous model for an average use case
Kathy using Instagram while she waits in line at the supermarket is not a useful point of comparison when we're comparing iterative improvements, keep up.
>Apple could have easily skipped releasing a new model this year, packaged exactly the same hardware and released the iPhone 16 the next year and fundamentally nothing would've changed.
What an absolutely ridiculous statement.
>But the shareholders won't like that, will they?
Low IQ statement.
Visually, sure. Under the hood? Wrong.
>The business model is built on a revolving demand cycle that is unrelated to long term thinking, maintainability, efficiency, nor sustainability.
Sorry you need to qualify this statement. An iPhone 6S is still completely usable and almost certain to be in a functional condition assuming it has been looked after correctly. That's a 8-9 year old phone. Meanwhile my 2001 phone was hopelessly outdated e-waste in 2007.
Anyone who's been around AI generated content for more than five minutes can tell you what's legitimate and what isn't.
For example this: https://www.maersk.com/logistics-explained/transportation-an... is obviously an AI article.
I’m not an expert in that topic at all, so I may not use the preferred terminology in all instances. Sorry."
What the hell is this?
Your take was worse