Maybe learn how to use it correctly in its current state

The slop being talked about in this article was made by OpenAI themselves. You know, the company at the forefront of the genAI/LLM bubble, with billions of dollars of money behind it?

I don’t know what kind of mythical standard it is that you believe generative AI is capable of, but when even the organization at the forefront of the tech can’t make this shit look good, you can’t exactly claim it’s a skill issue.

Mainly to identify plants and mushrooms.

Considering modern-day “AI” track records at this, the only thing I’d trust a device like that to do is massively increase poisoning deaths.

From the article, emphasis mine:

According to a report from Shanghai’s The Paper, the incident involved the company’s branch in Shenzhen’s Longhua district, where an employee involved in the filming said it was intended as a joke, and that the three employees in the video had volunteered to take part. The employee said the branch did not punish employees for small mistakes like forgetting straws.

On Wednesday afternoon, Good Me issued a public apology through its Weibo account. “We’re sorry,” it said. “We were playing with punchlines, and it went all wrong.”

Whether or not you might trust that statement, I do think it’s worthwhile context. This post seems to be making a mountain out of a molehill – even the actual article’s title/subtitle makes it clear this was a joke – and I find that in very poor taste given how high tensions are on this topic.

This is tangential, but am I the only one getting sick and tired of all the topics about China? The imperial core’s news industry’s obsession with the country has never been healthy, and none of the articles being posted have had me thinking any of that is changing. I’m seeing post after post, usually from the same two users, and I’m starting to worry that the line between “documenting the atrocities of an authoritarian country” and “sinophobia” might start to get blurry.

To be clear, I’m not trying to point fingers. I don’t want to make assumptions about the users in question. I’ve just been seeing this for a few months now and it’s getting on my nerves, especially given the political climate of the United States.

I don’t personally believe everything’s so bad as it looks. There’s a lot to be mad about, for sure, but it’s worth remembering that fear and anger are some of the best-selling emotions the news has to offer. Doubly so if it’s about China. But none of that means that things are substantially worse than they used to be. Some of it is that things weren’t as good as we thought, some of it is that things are being made to look worse than they are.

Either way, we didn’t start the fire.

Joel conceived the idea for the song when he had just turned 40. He was in a recording studio and met a 21-year-old friend of Sean Lennon who said “It’s a terrible time to be 21!” Joel replied: “Yeah, I remember when I was 21 — I thought it was an awful time and we had Vietnam, and y’know, drug problems, and civil rights problems and everything seemed to be awful.” The friend replied: “Yeah, yeah, yeah, but it’s different for you. You were a kid in the fifties and everybody knows that nothing happened in the fifties.” Joel retorted: “Wait a minute, didn’t you hear of the Korean War or the Suez Canal Crisis?” Joel later said those headlines formed the basic framework for the song.

I really don’t think these are the same group of people. From the article:

The strike was ignored in some areas, reflecting deep political divisions in Israel after nearly 11 months of fighting.

Those are the people you’re thinking of, and they aren’t striking.

Monopolies depend on the government to exist.

I very much disagree but respect a desire to not get into a debate, so I’ll leave it there.

I really don’t know what that means

“Your freedom ends at my face” is a saying used often here to contend with right-wing group’s insistence on “freedom,” often the kind that involves harming others; e.g. free speech absolutism and the “freedom” to spout neo-Nazi rhetoric that advocates for the murder of minorities, or the “freedom” to not get vaccinated and thus worsen a pandemic. A more full version might be “Your freedom to throw a punch ends where my face begins.” The idea is that it is fair to restrict a freedom if it supports the freedom of others — you might not trust governments to determine where those lines lie, and that’s fair, but that’s a separate issue.

Absolutely none of what you just said justifies Israel willfully bombing hostages.

I don’t know if libertarianism courts a different audience in Brazil, but in the U.S. it has a very rabidly right-wing audience who effectively want to tear down as much government as possible, and who view “your freedom ends at my face” as an insult. It’s the ideology of an extraordinarily unregulated market – a true “free market” – which is a monopolistic and wildly unethical disaster waiting to happen.

Anarcho-capitalism, which your username references, is all of that, only more. So you might understand why effectively everyone here is going to treat that with extreme suspicion.

It is, but DdCno1’s been taking a pro-Israel stance into a very, very pro-Palestine site. I really don’t know what else they’d expect besides pushback, honestly.

So you believe that erstwhile hostage rescuers have no responsibility to actually keep the hostages alive, then? Because you’re writing apologia for that.

a ruthless movement that would rather sacrifice every single Palestinian man, woman and child than surrender

You know, I’ve no love for Hamas whatsoever, but I can’t help but notice you consider “willingness to sacrifice civilians” to be somehow worse than, say, “actually, literally sacrificing civilians right now.” That’s not a very good look.

with the ICC waiting with handcuffs behind the banner

This implies other countries wouldn’t sooner dismantle the ICC than let it actually do its job, which sadly seems to not be the case.

^{(edit: typo)}

This is why I think monitored access is a better idea than total withholding. Kids are going to end up on social media; either as they grow up and eventually become adults, or as a result of peer providing access & pressure. Best to let them on, but ensure they are safe, know how to be safe, and know why to be safe.

Makes me wonder if it’s intentional to try to make society a worse place with inventive uses of pushing certain trends on international versions of tiktok instead of filtering them out.

Good lord, this is a massive reach. A much simpler explanation is that algorithmic garbage is profitable, and China’s government does not care about negative ramifications that occur outside China itself and so do not regulate it.

China’s run by a terrible government, not an MCU villain.

Not to mention the obscene fees with using it. Crypto is rife with issues.

I think we’re looking at a future where Google ensures we don’t ever have to worry about making such a choice.

This really doesn’t make Brave look any better though, seeing as it has its own version of “privacy-focused” attention-monetization schemes (Basic Attention Tokens) and its own fair share of controversies. Not to mention being Chromium under the hood and being developed by a company headed by Brandon Eich of all people — a massive homophobe.

None of which make Firefox impeccable or ever did. But all of which made Brave decidedly worse to me, including after this all happened.

I… can’t tell if this is sarcasm?

The core problem is that there are so many things that can help prevent the problems from arising to begin with that need to be done before policing is even considered. Better healthcare, housing, education, etc. Police are, at best, a last resort solution to desperate cases, and they tend to be hammers looking for nails as a result. It might be possible to do it well, yes, but it’s very hard, and you should really be looking for a less antagonistic solution first.

To take your idea of “speeding at 100+” as an example: This could be solved by replacing cars with public transport, such that people don’t really have so many opportunities to go 100+ to begin with, or by using traffic calming techniques to make it feel too unsafe for anyone to want to try, or using alternative road layouts to make it significantly harder to pull off at all (e.g. roundabouts). There are many options, almost all of which are better – and less punitive – than the police.

Also, tangential, but…

crisis councilors aren’t going to be driving trying to perform a PIT maneuver.

Of course not; PIT maneuvers would kill people.