The only times I've had it be remotely helpful is when you want something specific that's going to appear near the top of search results and is also likely to be buried in a bunch of irrelevant faff. Which is to say that occasionally "search for X and summarize the top result" is a useful tool but not often enough for them to front and center it like they do.
For example recipes. You can't copyright a recipe, so recipes tend to be buried in a lot of crap that isn't the actual recipe.
I mean, that's because googles AI over view is designed to summarize search results on a topic. On one hand that reduces the degree to which it will simply hallucinate, on the other sometimes the top search result is already as concise as it can be at the target grade level of writing.
"Yeah but my friends use Messenger!"
My mom uses Messenger. Acts like texting is too hard for her but Facebook Messenger isn't. Literally the only reason I have it installed on my phone, because otherwise I don't get the message when she needs something. If I could pry her away from it I could finally be done with the thing forever.
Even then, you have local voice recognition. You don't need to stream all microphone recordings to some central server for processing, you just do voice recognition and keep a log of say the last 100 nouns and a high priority log for the last twenty nouns used near verbs like purchase, buy or get. Then send those lists to the ad provider as context. All the hard work is done on the client device and the same backend used for ad context on web pages can be used for this as well.
See, that's fine the first time it happens. But after a couple of iterations you should have enough experimental data to know the answer that means you don't have to sleep on the couch.
That doesn't really work either, see pre release coverage for Deliverance: Kingdom Come and aside from a few articles during early crowdfunding about how they were naughty bad people for not having black people in a game set in a few square kilometers of 15th century Bohemia and having a "female character DLC" (the game has a fixed protagonist and the DLC lets you play from the perspective of another character, framed as her telling the MC about how she managed to escape the attack on their village). After the articles about them being racist and sexist for that, there was basically radio silence until it launched and was too big a deal to ignore.
Except they didn't really pick a side - they got attacked and responded in a way that was bad for PR but honestly kinda predictable. It all got sparked off by them getting a bad review that was mostly positive but penalized the Chinese game heavily inspired by a piece of classic Chinese literature (Journey to the West) for not being diverse enough (aka not featuring many women and no black people), 6/10. What they did since (the rules for streamers seeking a key) has been a (badly chosen) reaction to that.
Unless having a game heavily inspired by a piece of classical literature that doesn't express the racial and gender diversity of modern LA is itself choosing a side?
She'd already escaped. She was free of him. Then she got a gun, hunted him down, and shot him.
This is why she couldn't claim self defense or a battered woman defense - she'd already escaped.
Only after they're done conscripting all males 18-26, using the existing system that's been in place for decades.
You know, the one that's really unpopular to invoke, the one that's a quarter million dollar fine to not sign up for but enforcing that was so unpopular that they merely made proving you've signed up a requirement for things like going to college or getting some jobs if male, the one they recently made signing up all males of appropriate age for automatic?
We literally have child marriage in some states.
If you define "child marriage" as there being any scenario where someone under 18 might be married, then it's most states. Only 13 states actually ban child marriage under that definition.
The rest generally require you to be 18, but have exceptions with approval by the parents and/or a court (depending on the state). Four states have no hard minimum at all, one has a hard minimum of 15, most have a hard minimum of 16.
Same reason why the death penalty is bad - the system isn't perfect, and people get wrongfully convicted. Hell, a majority that the Innocence Project has gotten exonerated were convicted of sex crimes.
Permanently Deleted
So basically, “gender pay-gaps are fine, because the value of a woman is decided by the free market.”? Fuck that capitalist drivel…
Pay differences between different groups of performers are fine, because you can't pay more than you bring in in revenue and be sustainable. The WNBA makes 2% as much as the NBA and also gets subsidized by the NBA (as in the NBA pays the WNBA to be a thing).
Tear down the entire sexist gender-segregated professional sports industry for illegal/unconstitutional gender discrimination and require professional for-profit sports be co-ed like every other industry in this country is mandated to be.
Every "men's" sports league in the US allows women to compete, presuming they can compete at the same level. This is rare because of the general differences in height, weight and upper body strength between men and women, which are exacerbated when you start talking about professional athletes as they tend to be on the tail of the curve for those things.
Only women's sports leagues discriminate with respect to sex. Same as competitive chess, amusingly. This extends down to the school levels too, where a girl that wants to play a sport with only a boys team must be allowed to try out and make the team if she can perform at the requisite level but a boy wanting to play a sport with only a girls team is simply SOL as according to Title IX policy the former is sex discrimination but the latter is not.
The existence of women's sports is a form of protectionism.
Fuck the centuries of sexist tradition around sports. Just because it’s the way things have been, doesn’t mean it’s the way it ought to be. I’m sick and tired of the sexism and sexist apologia. If you think women deserve less, I don’t care what your excuse is, especially if your excuse is “the free market”. smh…
Professional sports is only sustainable if the athletes are paid less than the total amount of revenue less the costs of equipment, facilities, etc. In the case of the WNBA, their regular revenue is something like 1/50th of the NBA, and the NBA additionally pays about $15 million per year as a subsidy to help keep them afloat.
Advertising company makes it harder to block ads on their browser, news at 11.
Or did anyone forget that they made an explicit effort to block another ad blocking extension a while back, including blocking it from the Chrome store, blocking you from installing it manually and even blocking at least some versions of it from being manually installed in developer mode?
Ad nauseam, because it also simulated ad clicks and thus ruined their metrics.
EDIT: Fucking phone autocorrect. "as clocks" -> "ad clicks".
Only insofar as some instances block communication from some other instances. Not mine though, that's actually one of the reasons I picked it. That and it being by an org that's older than the web and runs a public unix server and a bunch of retrocomputing type services as well as fediverse stuff. They started out as a dialup anime BBS.
I don't know that it's net positive, probably closer to net neutral at best. A very small minority benefits from tampons in the boys room (trans and girls that ask boys to fetch one for them) and the cost is probably low, but definitely not free.
Free speech is protection from government oppression. Last I checked, I’m not the government, neither is Lemmy, neither is any other site on the internet that doesn’t end in .gov (typically), and this isn’t a free speech issue despite what MAGA idiots would have people think. If the platform wants that shit there, so be it, and I won’t use it when it’s painted on their front page. I use Lemmy because I was here (on another instance originally) before the MAGA weirdos decided to join to spread their bullshit, so I’ve had time to curate – apparently I have to do it again, or simply leave this instance.
This appears to be an argument against a position I wasn't taking. You just appear to be upset that alternative video streaming sites don't ban people you disagree with. Good luck with that.
Just because I use the internet (which I have been doing since only a few years after the WWW was invented), doesn’t mean I have to tolerate bullshit when I see it.
Hey, you may been around longer than I have. Only had the internet since the mid 90s. So it depends on how you define "a few". It was a very different beast back then, and I for one miss the relative lack of concentrated corporate control and mandatory advertiser-friendliness.
Perhaps if everyone was like this, the internet wouldn’t be the shithole it has become.
I chalk that up to said concentrated corporate control and mandatory advertiser-friendliness, but then I don't think it's become a shithole because people I disagree with also have a voice, but because of aggressive monetization and the enshittification that that inevitably entails.
And I’m done responding now, because clearly you and many others in this thread will never understand, or even care to understand.
No, you are well understood. You are opposed to alternative video platforms (and apparently some other unnamed Lemmy instance) because those things do not necessarily reinforce your echo chamber, and you consider that reinforcement a vital feature. I'm waaay over on the far end of the spectrum, and chose my instance specifically because they do not defederate, they keep everything available and leave it up to the user to decide what they do or do not wish to see (and I to date have nothing blocked - no users, no communities, no servers).
You do know there's a big difference between a "default" option and a "mandatory" setting, right? Specifically that you do, in fact, have a choice to change a default?
Not forcing the user to proactively make a choice is not the same thing as denying the user the ability to choose.
(such as screaming fire in a movie theater when there is no fire)
This idiom comes from an analogy in a SCOTUS opinion arguing that checks notes it's a violation of the Espionage Act to distribute flyers that oppose the draft. That case was later partly overturned in Brandenburg v Ohio and the standard is that speech isn't incitement unless it is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action. To the point that "$SLUR should hang from trees" is probably protected speech (because the lawless action isn't imminent), but "you guys, grab that $SLUR over there so we can string them up!" probably isn't.
So defending free speech inevitably means defending white supremacists and the like because free speech doesn't actually protect anything if it doesn't protect upsetting, outrageous, or offensive speech (and likewise, the arbiter of what counts as offensive is not guaranteed to always be on your side). It's why the ACLU has defended them on more than one occasion. H.L. Mencken put it best.
“The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.” ― H.L. Mencken
...if fresh. Vitamin C is relatively fragile.