894 karma · joined June 6, 2026
The mechanism of how advertising works seems to be not that. I think repeatedly brand exposure does something to the brain and decision making that we don’t fully understand.
Putting the societal onus of homophobia on gay people just makes no sense. Even a couple seconds of thought will completely demolish that reasoning. So, think.
If it makes you feel any better, it is literally impossible to remember it. You can’t be traumatized by it even if you wanted to.
How you dress, how you speak, how you walk, who you are friends with, what shows you watch, who you respect, how you show that respect, what you do, how you earn a living, how you have sex, how you obtain relationships. Everything, from life until death.
The perfect man is the perfect cog. He works, he doesn’t think too much, he walks and talks right, he makes moral love to his wife, and he raises his kids in a standard American family hand-picked for him by his forefathers. Any deviance from that is marks-off.
I think a lot of men need to believe that their life just so happens to perfectly fit the mold, but you see, it’s by choice. If that’s what they need to believe to be happy, then okay. I’m fine with that.
The biggest proponents of AI, the people who created it, who value it most, have stated again and again “this will ruin your life” “this threatens humanity” “you all will be out of a job”.
Do you think that messaging, from the people MOST OPTIMISTIC about AI, inspires confidence in… well… anyone?
Luddites are luddites because you, yes YOU, created them. People wouldn’t be Luddites if their lives weren’t threatened. Of course they’re Luddites!
And, for the record, I’m not a Luddite. I’m just not fucking braindead and understand that, if we want AI to go anywhere, we have to stop making it out to be a world-ending mayday situation.
If you tell people “this will ruin your life” then guess what? They won’t want to support that thing. Congratulations, you’ve just achieved the reasoning skills of the average American five year old.
Now can we all move on and stop sabotaging any sort of progress? The impediment to AI isn’t Luddites, it’s you. It’s AI proponents. Who can’t listen and who can’t understand that making enemies turns you into an enemy.
This argument of “you’re stupid and I’m not” is not a winning one. If you want naysayers to listen, you have to address their concerns. Not pretend their concerns aren’t valid.
What I’m learning from this comment section is that a lot of supposedly smart people have the reasoning and persuasion skills of small children. I mean, really guys?
You’ve told these people that this technology will destroy the labor market and their means of living and you’re actually shocked they might be a little skeptical? Really? Is your brain functioning okay? Did you take your medicine today?
Frankly, the Luddites have been more than generous and understanding with their perspective. The technocrats have been incredibly, unbelievably, unfathomably shit with their posturing and persuasion. Jesus Christ, get a grip.
The posturing from AI executives has been this will destroy labor. Whether or not that actually happens doesn’t matter - that’s their stance, their dream. They say it basically every chance they get.
Why, then, would average people want to help the people who very plainly state they are against them? It makes no sense.
Everyone here is shocked that average people aren’t willingly to obviously advocate against themselves. Uh, yeah duh. Nobody would.
There’s a lot of well-earned distrust in AI as a whole. The end result is people don’t trust AI companies or their endeavors. This distrust was curated and built by people like Altman and Dario. It didn’t come out of nowhere.
If you want people to support your projects, you have to at least PRETEND you’re on their side. Telling them straight-up “I intend to ruin your life” isn’t a winning strategy. And, everyone, let’s stop pretending like this is our first day on Earth.
Business people should understand, at a high technical level, how their products work and what they’re actually asking to implement.
I’ve worked with many great business analysts and product people and consistently the best ones are the ones with the “engineer brain”. They might not know how to read even a single line of code, but they understand software products from their pieces. Those people consistently propose high-quality and feasible solutions. Other business people do not.
As developers, we are expected to constantly think on our feet and adapt. We learn new products and methods on practically a weekly basis. But for whatever reason, the business folk are not even expected to understand the product they help build. There’s such a large disconnect there between dev and business.
I think basically all people who were socialized male have had these experiences at one point or another, whether it be in football, in class, in the military, at sleepovers, in the locker room.
My point is more so that football has a particular “culture”, or it did when I was a kid. And that culture was not necessarily socially productive at a young and impressionable age. When we see certain behaviors in particularly young men, we have to wonder where they come from, and what we are doing to cultivate that.
Masculine culture has traditionally, and currently, favored conformance and lack of individuality over basically everything else. It’s one of the more toxic parts of masculinity as portrayed by the patriarchy.
There are many ways to be a woman. There are many ways to be a gay man. There’s really only one way to be a straight man, if you want to be valuable in the eyes of the patriarchy. It’s all about conformity, conformity, conformity. No deviancy, no thoughts, just a blank slate of a man ready for work, family, and an early death, be it at war or doing stupid things.
There is something to be said about the socialization of sports. But there is such a thing as negative socialization, regression even. I would say football consistently has one of the most toxic cultures of any sport. It’s improving, very slowly. But there’s more to gain than just lower head injury risk by switching to a different sport.
Of course people get hurt in soccer, but that’s out of the ordinary. For football, getting hurt is the ordinary. Most likely people aren’t calling ambulances because getting shaken up and a bit nauseated is par for the course for football.
NOT “do kids use AI?”
NOT “do professionals use AI?”
And not whatever other question we can conjure up. At the end of the day, if AI makes learning worse, then it doesn’t fucking matter how ubiquitous or awesome or cool it is. Because we’re sacrificing other skills that WE KNOW and have established that we need.
You think they were fucking gambling on their iPhones in 1890? They weren’t even doing that in 2012! Get real.
People are acting like we’re going to 1984. No, we’d be going back to the status-quo a few years ago.
We tried the whole “legalize sports betting” thing, really we did. We gave it an honest shot. But it turns out everyone was right all along: it causes a lot of problems for a lot of people, it’s complex legally, and it offers no benefit to society.
There are legitimate, ethical ways to make money, and then not so ethical ones. It seems for tech companies, they often can’t find the ethical ways or they simply don’t produce enough money, and so they feel forced to act unethically.
The only reason they get away with it is… well everyone is doing it. It’s a culture problem, and it’s viral to the entire tech economy. Nobody cares about being scummy, doing things behind users backs, invading their privacy, employing dark patterns, or even leaking highly sensitive data.
You can absolutely run systemd-init without systemd-journald, and some distros do.
And, when they do, it’s because AI can write code. Take for example financial analysis. AI sucks ass at that, but it’s good at writing code. You’re using it to write code to do the analysis.
When you ask AI a math question, it’s not answering the question. It’s writing a program to answer the question. Because AI is basically only useful for writing code.
Everything is very unstable right now. This is still a very new tool and we’re very much experimenting on a product level.
Of course anyone can be individually racist. But institutionally, no. The American institutions and systems have always been white-focused, black people simply do not have the power to be institutionally racist.
I mean, has there ever been any anti-white law ever written in the US? No, because it’s not possible. The institution which makes, and enforces, the law is itself white.
Most distributions only use some of them, and the “some” set is different from distro to distro. Many distros swap parts out. And some distros only use systemd-resolved.
Systemd is, legitimately, well divided. Most of the complaints against systemd are from people who know basically nothing about systemd.
It’s a measuring and risk-aversion problem, not necessarily a legal problem.
When people say systemd they really mean systemd-init, which is one piece of software. Not systemd-resolved, which is another.
It's the same reason why Flock is so popular. It's just cameras, who cares right? Well Flock is popular for the organization, it's an accountability sink. The government can't just stand up a bunch of cameras, people will complain. Ahh, but Flock can. The entire economic value of Flock is purely the accountability laundering, the technology is just a footnote.
Really, many organizations in the US boil down to this. Producing value is hard, producing fake value is easy.
We can argue about whether AI is a net-good for society and if the ends justify the means, but I think it's clear that a lot of people who worked very hard are getting fucked over. Is that okay? Are we really fine with piloting the idea "if you're rich enough you can do anything"?
Because, the reality is that if you or I did this, as many have done before, we would be getting sued to oblivion. Assuming we don't straight-up go to jail. But then AI superscalers do the same thing, on the order of 10,000, and somehow nobody goes to jail. Is that really the kind of message we want to send?