harimau777

How are men supposed to develop that self confidence?

FWIW, in these sorts of situations I try to link the place where I found the news. If some tiny local news website brought something to my attention that the bigger players don't, then I think they deserve to be rewarded with the add revenue if people follow my link.

Can you expand on this? It seems to me that deep seated cultural issues are the sort of thing that therapy is supposed to address. However, I may be looking at this from the wrong angle.

Agreed! It seems to me that a model like public utilities or even NASA might be a better approach. This just doesn't seem like the sort of thing that is a good match for profit motive.

Isn't that how democracy is supposed to work? If you believe something should change, then you attempt to create a well crafted message to convince people to agree with you.

Maybe the people building the data centers should actually do a decent job of winning people over to their side then. They could start by rejecting MAGA and using their money to help make its victims whole. Then maybe they could figure out a way to make AI actually good for your average person.

Personally almost everyone I know absolutely despises AI. That's to say nothing of all the people who had their work stolen to make AI or who have had their careers destroyed by AI.

It doesn't seem like the people most opposed to AI are the people opposing more energy. Wasn't it MAGA that was fighting solar and off shore wind?

People's hatred of AI is no psyop. People just hate AI.

Why should we believe that we will meaningfully benefit from that economic growth? We aren't benefiting much now. And if we won't benefit then why should we care about it?

I mean, if the new economic activity primarily serves to further enrich the wealthy then ya, that seems like a reasonable stance.

I think that part of the problem might be that people don't trust corporations. Sure, they say all that, and that may even be the current plan, but is that how things will actually end up? Will there be consequences "unintended" consequences like polution? Will this be used as a stepping stone to something that is harmful?

Where the rich and powerful are involved, maybe it's better not to take the risk.

The problem is that Google's AI search basically doesn't work. It routinely can't understand even simple prompts and is the only AI I've used that routinely hallucinates.

A couple that I can think of are: banner ads, sponsored results, subscriptions

Sure, but that only works if corporations are willing to value being a decent person in their hiring and performance reviews. In my experience, that is not the case at all.

To what degree are the employees getting the benefit of any increased productivity from AI?

I guess people go where the incentives are. For at least the last decade that sort of behavior hasn't been punished or has even been rewarded (see: the entire Trump administration).

Meanwhile, being a decent person carries very little benefit anymore. So it's probably not surprising that people no longer take the effort.

I mean, generally speaking they actually haven't. Look at all the candidates who abandoned trans rights.

Why should someone vote for the Democrats when they will just throw us under the bus the moment it becomes convenient?

If I remember correctly, the crime statistic that they give in one of the movies is also much lower than many US cities.

A major portion of vocal 2A advocates cite the need to own guns in order to protect against government overreach. The argument being made is that the government is now overreaching but the 2A advocates aren't actually using their guns to protect against it.

With respect, I think you might not spend much time in leftist spaces. Leftists are notoriously vicious in attacking people for ideological impurity. Is it possible that you are conflating leftists and liberals/mainstream democrats?

Most people recognize that the freedom of speech is not absolute. Leftists arguing for hate speech laws are generally doing so from a reasoned position that hate speech falls within the "not absolute" area. You may disagree with them, but that doesn't mean that they are hypocrites.

On the other hand, there's not an apparent principled reason why the government's actions here wouldn't fall under the arguments made by the 2A advocates that the parent is referring to. Therefore, it appears to be hypocracy.

That being said, I run in fairly left wing crowds and the idea of passing hate speech laws almost never comes up. I'm sure that there are people who would support that, but there simply isn't any meaningful movement to actually try to make it happen.

Yes, and the issue at hand here is neither of those.

Just because it is assumed by someone doesn't make them right.

Things aren't that simple. Some illegal immigrants were brought here long before they were old enough to have a say. Some were here legally but then Trump canceled their asylum.

That's not relevant to him spying on political enemies.

Their speech doesn't strike me as all that different from other religious texts like the Dao De Jing.

Do you have any evidence that they spend their whole day on their smartphones? It's also not clear to me that they claim to live exactly like their ancestors. They just claim to have knowledge that was refined and passed on to them by their ancestors.

Can you explain why you think that it shouldn't have weight?