That's cool - send her a password protected zip file and bring in a copy of the password on paper: "EmailIsInsecureByDesignThisIsNotHIPPACompliant123!"
Hey! Ok, so they had 2 decent employees. Cool, good to know.
And I get it, both it's a paycheck and you're just a well-paid cog in the machine. It's the tragedy of the commons. They're not the one making bots post AI slop or exploiting my data, so it's not on them. But I expect that it's a touchy place to say they work sometimes. But by working there they let other people do their jobs to help other people do their jobs to enable decisions like all the stuff that's enshittifying everything. Such is life, sometimes.
Pollock's art is splatters and swirls and whatnot, but his process wasn't just random splatters. He knew when his art was done because it felt done to him.
Likewise, a QR code isn't random splatters, either. Both are intentionally created to have meaning. One as a work of art that should make the viewer feel something at an emotional level, and one to tell you that the restaurant you're in hasn't updated their menu since COVID.
AI art isn't art because gen AI is trained on art without the ability to feel or sense the emotions it's trying to convey. If I take a picture of an artwork and try and copy it at home, I haven't created art. I've copied someone else's art. I've made a picture, a copy of the original. If the AI hasn't been trained on, let's say, cubism, I can't show it ONE image of cubism and hope it can go from there and be creative and reach the same point. I can't describe cubism and expect it to achieve the same thing. The best it can ever manage is to copy an original work it was trained with.
No one chooses to be born, which is a condition stretching back to the first cellular life on this planet. That anyone should get a "stake" in their own birth is a ridiculous premise that defies the logic of how life works and the impermanence of everything in our universe. We are the only species that cares to consider beyond biological impulses if we should reproduce, which is a luxury. Responsible use of resources to care for any being in your care, be that a human or a pet, is an individual choice. An unhoused person can be a better pet parent than a rich person, and if you'll notice, the Idiocracy prediction of smart people having fewer kids is playing out with or without anti-natalist support.
Or if you want to go with the reincarnation-approved viewpoint, we ALL chose to be born in some pre-incarnation realm, and we're all set up in soul groups and we all have lives to live that make none of this worth discussing unless it harms others, which is something the pro-natalists are more into by wanting to disenfranchise childless and child-free people.
No. Even if had ever wanted to, when I've needed to hire someone the baseline of competency and was such that we were happy to have the most qualified person be willing to take lower pay than they probably deserved as it was all we could afford. It's hard to present a legitimate reason to hire a candidate that's genuinely less qualified that someone else unless they're just waaay over qualified.
Plus, the guy was way wrapped up in financing stuff, which just attracts other money-grubbing people anyway. Same with Harvey Weinstein, where they use the money and cloud of flies buzzing around them as the cover if they get caught. They use the ones that didn't know about their crimes as protection. Fully disgusting, but such is the thrall of money I suppose.
The worst part is that it would never be viewed legally as a monopoly because it simply isn't.
Vimeo and Dailymotion have been around for years, and Odysee isn't too bad. Facebook and IG host short video, then you have all the mostly shithole "free speech = trash YT demonetized" sites like Rumble and BitChute and Kick and I think a couple others.
The actual worst part is that there's no cohesive audience for each platform, and YT is always the absolute go-to for media like music videos and music due to copyright license agreements.
Maybe just let people decide for themselves and not for some sort of false choice that they need to make 800 babies or 0 babies and nothing in between is acceptable.
Which is obvious because they call AI images "art." They're not. AI images are patterns to fit a mathematical probability. It's the difference between calling a Jackson Pollock and a QR code art.
It's the pro-surveilance people that want to monetize your data. They try and lean on fear and push this "only ISIS uses Signal" narrative that is obviously false.
It's just so preposterous - businesses and payment processors rely on e2ee just as much as anyone else does. The one time we're on the same team they just want a carve out for businesses or something I expect.
yeah, I checked it out a few months ago and it was....sparse. I'll give it another go around. The hard part about replacing IG is that the only things I like on IG are cooking and cat related, but my spouse and 1 friend send things basically every day.
Thanks - I was looking at it the other day. I have a few other project ideas that might be better for Ghost and peertube, but that's a longer-term project.
"It's for the children! No more crosswalks! Just frogger it, kids!" -Ron DeSantis