Goatse, tubgirl, meatspin, or the BME pain olympics are not exactly hallmarks of quality communication and restricting that type of content is valid for minors. It’s not censorship to try to avoid desensitizing kids too early. Sometimes, people need experience before they can see the horrors.
Hah. As somebody that had to be driven to the bus stop because it was over a mile away, I call BS.
People go to casinos and play slots for a hit of brain chemicals. They’re not there for art. Nor are whales in most mobile games.
I’ll bet some exec thinks an AI-enhanced Skinner box would interesting to see.
Sorry, not in budget for this year. Do it in prod and write up the cap-ex proposal for next year.
Non-existent in the US thanks to whack-ass tariffs unfortunately. We love hindering our adoption of climate change reducing technology for political points.
Thanks to federation, the copies of the eggs are. You can’t stop one instance from selling data sourced from federated content until it’s too late.
Oh no, it’s the consequences of my actions by putting all my eggs in one basket and giving a corporation incredible leverage.
Maybe they should derisk their infrastructure then…
You think Microsoft has no assets in Europe? Asset seizure is a sure fire way to get paid when companies refuse to cooperate.
Arch isn’t going anywhere. There will always be builds for power users. If not, forks will happen.
The money left the account 1 second after it hit, that bank likely has nothing to return.
lol Finance is sometimes hilariously low tech. Lookup how ACH works, it’s a fucking farce.
And Timothy McVeigh.
Video proof can be deepfaked now. We’ll need to have recordings capture public keys of people in frame so they can be verified as real or not.
If an AI can outperform a human doctor, isn’t that a good thing? We should always strive to improve survival for patients - it’s not about doctors jobs but patient survival and long term health outcomes.
I would love for doctors to become AI if the AI improves our growing health inequities and inequalities.
But some smaller, more integrous and creative influencers might.
Good, maybe they’ll get a productive job then and stop forcing their attempts at being influencers. You either are or aren’t one; they clearly don’t have what it takes to influence their viewers to buy sponsor products as efficiently.
Advertising isn’t a noble business and influencers are just advertisers. There is no noble human spirit in advertising, it is (and always has been) an exploitative and ignoble career.
Purely as an investor: if they can sustain that revenue growth the IPO will be a smash.
Never invest in companies you love or you won’t exit when you should.
Agreed. Streaming services always seemed like gilded cages to me. You can only see what they allow you to see - piracy or old-school Netflix DVD delivery gives you all the options. The promise of being able to stream any content at any time, with the producers and people involved being able to get compensated fairly and justly, just isn’t reality with these ghouls running the show.
The model (in the current form, of artificially restricted licensing) seems like less a way to curate a media catalog, but more like a way to curate the subscribers and culture.
“I reject your reality and substitute my own!”
Based on the information the ad services know about individual viewers, they could customize the ads using invented models that perfectly match the viewers’ ethnicity/demographics.
IMO hyper-individualized ads that are personalized would increase diversity. It’d also be a new frontier in advertising manipulation.
Here are the lines from the guy I replied to:
And…
Allowing any censorship would be a bad thing, according to that poster, so I provided a reason why some censorship may be desired.
Your argument is not on censorship yes or no, but on how far. That’s a different discussion.