Skip Navigation

Posts
0
Comments
371
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Love the recursion.:-)

  • Thanks so much for the info - I'll save it and check it out, it does look neat!:-)

  • I wouldn't mind if like I told my phone to send out a signal "I am a man, but I like cold tea". Partnering together with the machine to help me buy something I will enjoy is truly helpful.

    Consent makes all the difference in the world.

  • Ofc it could have been benign, but there is no evidence that it was, while conversely everything that we currently know points to a breach of ethics.

    One, they did not fully disclose that a camera was even there (unless I am mixing up this story with another one just like it?). That also makes it impossible to...

    Two, they did not obtain proper (or any) consent. A banking ATM that needs to use your face to verify your identity could be an example of a benign use, and ignoring the enormous potential security implications of that atm, it could do so with a popup on the screen "Do you consent to having your face observed?", "Do you consent to storage of your facial data in our database?", "Do you consent to us selling the marketing data we collect from analysis of your facial data?". They did none of this.

    Three, when asked about it, they lied. Technically they obfuscated the truth, which is just another way of stating that they lied.

    Ofc it COULD have been benign, but so far they are zero out of three already towards that end - and that is even from just what we know so far.

  • Their corporate website mentions that they use the data for marketing purposes. Whatever type of face they see - e.g. male or female, large or skinny, etc. - gets correlated with what was purchased, and then they sell that data for marketing purposes. Exactly like Google selling your search history, except with likely fewer restrictions in place.

    Their website doesn't mention how often they get hacked to give away that data for free - to be clear, that data meaning A PICTURE OF YOUR ACTUAL FUCKING FACE. I don't know what resolution, or even what someone would do with it later, I am focusing here on the fact that the picture taking seems nonconsensual, especially for it to be stored in a database rather than simply used in the moment.

  • Surely many who have them received them from elsewhere before immigration to America, and likewise the proportion of immigrants who have them I would expect to be oversized. Americans tend to be more greedy than anything else and don't put in the effort required for such small (financial) rewards.

    Also, those with PhDs tend to congregate into certain areas that support those jobs, i.e. cities but not even a goodly number of those so much; plus smaller college towns too ofc. As such, many in the general populace might rarely if ever run into one for the largest majority of their lives, unless traveling specifically to those areas for some reason?

    And ofc rural areas are far larger, geographically speaking, than places where a person with a PhD would (likely) go. So you could randomly pick a spot on a map 100 times and never manage to find someone with a PhD anywhere within tens of miles, I would expect - although that line of thinking reveals my own biases: do most educated farmers stop at like an MS and just follow up with their own (possibly even extensive) self studies, or go all the way to PhDs while working their actual farms? (I doubt it bc it does not sound practical, and that is a hallmark of farmers afaik, but I could be wrong...) Anyway, I expect the unequal distribution is a contributing / exasperating factor to the general rarity.

  • But also, there is far less training data to mix and match responses from, so naively I would expect a higher plagiarism rate, by its very nature.

    Less than 2% of the world's population has a doctorate. According to the US Census Bureau, only 1.2% of the US population has a PhD.

    source

  • Oh I should have added a /s I guess - gVim is really old, and while I literally do use it (DAILY) and also legit DO think that it is great, I am not really advocating for it. I have heard great things about Sublime, but even that is dated and apparently neovim is much more highly regarded. Anyway, thanks for pointing that out!:-)

  • Yeah, gVim is pretty great, isn't it? :-P

  • B-b-but it clearly says right there in the todo, that's good enough, r-r-right?!

  • Fwiw, I think you are also right too:-). I understand somewhat what the OP is trying to say here: you need to get over yourself, and put in some WORK to get you through the cognitive dissonance that reading is likely to cause. However, try saying that in ANY other context:

    • a white person to a black person: "uh, have you tried just getting over it? slavery was hundreds of years ago now, and it's not like I ever owned any slaves" (note that there is just too much wrong here to even begin to unpack in a short space, but here I am focusing on how insensitive it is: even though black people would LOVE to simply "get over it", especially for it to STOP HAPPENING, as in right this very moment, that is a PROCESS and they cannot simply snap their fingers and wish away an entire history built upon it, e.g. how police - and employers - will treat someone different based on color of skin)
    • an old man (or woman) to a young girl: "you know you would look prettier if you smiled more, right?" (okay... first, this is objectively true, but once again, it's nowhere near the point - if she is frowning or whatever, simply telling her to plaster over her emotional state and "be pretty", for the sake of the external viewer and once again, regardless of how she feels about the whole thing - is again extremely insensitive?)
    • a man to a woman: "sexism is a thing over the past, maybe if you want a higher salary you should just work harder?" (as is the theme here, this is like 90% untrue, even if it contains a germ of truth - some women can rise up, despite the shackles, and indeed you'll never know if you do not try and all that but... dayum, how insensitive to phrase it like this?)

    In all of these, the packaging seems equally as important as the message itself, if not more so. Now, my own reply did take an unnecessarily aggressive stance, though it was intentionally modeled after the one I read out from OP's wording, in an attempt to highlight it better (since some people can see some things more clearly when they are repeated back to them, perhaps they are too close to fully see the implications of their own stance?). And I dunno, sometimes that works... but it does seem far more likely that a gentler approach might result in a better chance of reception?

    For instance, each of my above instances could have been rephrased:

    • I hope that one day you find the peace to move beyond the hurts of the past. I know that you can't right now b/c it's still happening, but I do have hope that one day we can get there, together.
    • I am sorry that you are having a bad day - is there anything I can do to help? If not, I at least hope that it will get better for you.
    • You cannot control things beyond yourself, but if you want to make the attempt, I support you - go get it girl! :-P

    Rather than shame the already-victims, putting the onus on the receiver to do ALL the work, wouldn't a true leader (or at least encourager) inspire their audience to do the desired task, as in empower them to do what they should want already to do? (dayum, that sounded really profound, - I better write that down!:-P)

  • Oh absolutely. And this being in academia, they likely will lose their job over it - like that Harvard professor who was accused of a highly similar form of plagiarism (borrowing long stretches of text while failing to cite the original source material). I was pointing out the absurdity of not doing that for politicians and CEOs:-(.

  • They might literally have had some psychological issue, where they were trying to see how far they could push it without being caught.

    Or this whole article could be a hit job - maybe the original thesis literally wrapped these sections with text saying "here is an example of a plausible attempt at plagiarism that would not get caught today - please do not quote me out of context here, m'kay?". The devil is in the details, and I for one am not volunteering to put in the amount of effort it would take to properly judge this person.

    Although I bet their bosses are, now.

  • Lolz how about "no".

    Now, if you bothered to continue to read past that, note that I am a STRONG advocate for reading. Not only that, but I read a lot myself. In fact, whenever I encounter something BEAUTIFULLY written, I literally cannot put it down (sometimes I just force myself, especially to eat, then continue) - a recent example is https://medium.com/@max.p.schlienger/the-cargo-cult-of-the-ennui-engine-890c541cebcb, which I read just at the time of the Reddit protests and it really hit the spot. Nor was it mere intellectual masturbatory exposition either - it convinced me to drop Reddit, and if I ever did join something else (at the time, Kbin, before I gave up on it and switched to Lemmy), to make sure that I did not allow it to become what Reddit had started to be for me: an addiction. Yes, my community needed a moderator if it was going to survive - but why should that be me, in perpetuity? (especially with the mod tools going to shit)

    "Flatland" was another that was just... chef's kiss, I literally dreamed about it, and it ignited in me a renewal of my desire for reading after grad school had me too read-out. It has a sequel too btw, Sphereland. If Flatland offends people, look it up - it was ancient satire (in all likelihood).

    So I READ, muddafucker, I DO. But when someone tells me that I HAVE to, I nope out, instantly. Ironically, I know that I am the one being true punk here, whatever words people may want to throw at me.

    How about drawing people in by making a product that encourages people to want to read this shit?

  • It makes sense - he spent so much time learning how the system worked, enough to get around it, so now he makes a living continuing the exploit. Many politicians and CEOs do the same.

  • I think that one was inevitable, due to humans encroaching upon the bats territory and how fast it mutates - people were warning about it being inevitable over a decade ago. But yeah, climate change could bring about the next one. (Link)

  • Okay not sure about this based on on the other responses but...sure why not, so here goes:

    "It looks like you already have".:-P