throwfaraway135

- Heavy censorship

- Two-tier justice system

- This

How did it come to this? The UK is arguably the country that has done the most for the cause of freedom, having led the way in abolishing slavery.

Nice! This is a big pain point for many of us. But unfortunately I don't see our company agreeing to allow some third party "potential" access to our chats. If it's some large company like slack or Telegram maybe but for sure not a small startup.

There is no good financial advice which works for everyone[1]. A lot of people may make enormous money on the short term and bail out before the crash. Or it may be exact opposite.

[1] Psychology of money

Anyone who had even a little connection to Epstein should be thoroughly investigated. Unfortunately, that won't happen regardless of which party holds the reins.

As for Gates it didn't help that he was pretending to be holier than thou.

Whoever thinks Disney/Hollywood cares even a little bit about children is delusional.

Obligatory link to Ricky Gervais roast at the Golden Globes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgson2Q3nog

Every project has simple parts and complex parts. I understand why you wouldn't want AI or people who haven't proven themselves to make contributions to the complex parts, but pretending there aren't a lot of places where AI can create more than adequate contributions is a strange hill to die on.

I think this is a nothingburger, anyone who has been on the internet for a week should have thicker skin that this. I'm sure you can find thousands of cases where an author of a PR is indignant because it didn't get accepted.

AI is a mirror of humanity and seeing it act like us shouldn't be surprising.

The criticism seems politically motivated. Considering what happened to Blue Origin, SpaceX's success is commendable. Although I agree $1.8T seems crazy.

You only need to look at Britain to see how much of a bad idea this is. As for CSAM I don't believe AI can't be used to solve that.

Am I the only one who was impressed by the interior design? But yeah, the body is ugly as hell, I think it lacks aggression in the design.

There is a good chance Software Engineering will disappear similar to lamplighters, ice cutters and the others which names we don't even remember. Is this good or bad? Who knows, at least till now technology brought better living standards for almost all of us.

In modern politics the end justifies the means.

Are you pro abortion? The end justifies the means, because you are saving women.

Are you pro live? The end justifies the means, because you are saving babies.

As long as the playing field is good vs evil there can't be a rational discussion.

People are afraid, large technological changes generally prelude large economic and social changes, some of which is going to be terrible.

I'm surprised anyone would ask. For example this https://www.worldhistory.org/image/6002/marble-bust-of-a-you...

I don't get the argument, there are a million other places you can (and have) black people being part of "western culture", just to list a few sports, music, politics, military, literature and the list goes on. In some of them they are the predominant group.

By your logic every movie should have a lot more east Asians, Indians, Native American etc. which I don't see anybody pushing for.

I think we agree there are a lot of books which you can make movies about where it is more than reasonable to have a black cowboy protagonist.

And this is the right way to do things, and not by pity race swapping some famous character/historical figure.

If you go to the streets of Athens and show them two pictures one of Diane Kruger and one Lupita Nyong'o, and ask them who they think represents Helena of Troy more I'm certain you are going to get Diane as the definitive answer.

I'm also certain that many will feel the casting of Lupita Nyong'o as cultural appropriation while the same will be less true for Diane Kruger.

I'm not saying the Greeks should decide who to cast in a US film, but the argument that if the actress isn't Greek then any other choice has the same level of accuracy is wrong.

I think this makes my argument even more true. Imagine you have a budget and want to create a western/cowboy movie. You care about representation and want to have more black cowboys in the movies.

Option A: Take a story with a white cowboy, cast a black guy for him and shoot the movie.

Option B: Find a story of a black cowboy (and as you said there were many of them) and shoot a movie about it.

IMHO option A is patronizing while option B is empowering. Because option A assumes there were no black cowboys, there are no good stories too tell about black people.

I don't get your argument. You can look at historical monuments or modern Greeks and Brad Pitt doesn't look to different from them.

Let me try to elaborate on my argument. Imagine you are in a park and there are three children playing, child A, B and C. Imagine child A has 10 toys, B has 7 and C 1.

Now if you forcefully took toys from A and B and gave them to C, then that's patronizing behavior as it means "you can't have your own toys, you need to steal them from someone else, you are not good enough".

A more respectful way of solving the dilemma for all involved parties is by just getting more toys for child C.

One thing that always rubs me the wrong way in this type of situations, is how patronizing it is towards black people.

It got the "let little timmy play too" vibe all over it. It hints that there are no interesting historical events with black people having a major role in it that you would want to create a movie about.

Look, this is tangential, for what is worth I don't agree with a lot of what ICE is doing.

My argument is that if you have two injustices A and B with severity of lets say 50/100 and 90/100. And injustice A is being globally protested, but injustice B is ignored, then your fight is not for justice, then you are being used as a political tool.

My argument is not about the legality, but selectivity of the outrage. Somehow if it's politically beneficial there are a ton of people outraged, and in other times like the pedophile scandal of the century, with a lot of powerful people in it, no one seams to really care.

The last time I looked illegal immigration is still illegal.

I don't see people protesting en masse to take Clinton, Trump, Gates etc. accountable. Maxwell Ghislaine is alive and well, and they can't get a incrementing confession.

But somehow people loose their shit when some MS-13 gang members get arrested.

I'm against this type of surveillance everywhere, but seeing the holier than thou attitude of some of the comments rubs me the wrong way.

Doing basically the same for people who are on the Epstein list was OK, but now it's wrong?

In a lot of 3rd world and less well off countries, childcare is done by the grandparents(mostly grandmothers), I'm always surprised why this isn't true in the west.

Here we have an aging population, so grandparent/grandchild ratio should be very high.

thanks, fixed

I didn't intend it to be bait. It is a generalization, but if you read carefully, there is "a lot" at each point.

And pretending that there aren't large swaths of people who have different ideas and you can group them into "tolerant" and "none tolerant" is also a generalization.

I agree with the sentiment, but unfortunately often this is too simplistic.

For example, a lot of Palestinians are not tolerant towards LGBT people -> a lot of LGBT people are not tolerant towards Israelis -> a lot of Israelis are not tolerant towards Palestinians.

Also how do you know if you are intolerant or intolerant towards intolerance?

I agree that communities should try to protect themselves from malicious actors.

But the part about FOSS being used in a project not aligned with the creator's values seams hypocritical:

IMO FOSS is a gift to humanity and as such:

"A gift should be given freely, without obligation or expectation, as a true expression of love and kindness"

Pre the AI era at least morally they would have a stronger case, but now this is kind of hypocritical.

They also started caring about this, probably because they don't want their competitors to get the same data as they have.