I'm not saying all hypotheticals are useless. This one of whether a ship is still the same in particular is, though (other than for fun). Imaginary numbers were discovered as a tool while solving mathematical problems, so I would not say they are the same.
Cloning is a special case because answering the question is actually necessary for practical purposes in the real world. Debating whether a child who grew up is a different person because all the cells in the body were replaced, or whether your contract on a dock is voided because you replaced all the boards on a ship one after the other, doesn't really have any effect on practical life.
I'm not saying anybody having fun theorizing these things is insane, because I agree it can be fun - I'm saying anybody doing it "seriously" would be, in my eyes.
Same when a child grows up. Is it the same person? Any sane person would say yes. Anybody who just enjoys debating pointless things would open a Pandora's box.
I'm 32 and having a kid soon, so not sure where you see the problem? Sure some of them had kids very early, but that doesn't change the fact many didn't.
This is not true. While SUV popularity among women is increasing for the reason you describe, they make only 52% of owners (proportional to percentage of women in society). Trucks are still overwhelmingly owned by men.
Thought I'd clear that up so nobody thinks they learned some "facts" that turn out to be fake.
The article explicitly states a model is being trained on private data.
You have avoided answering any of my questions and resorted to basically name calling. In light of it, I also see no longer any value in talking to you. Have a nice day.
Did you read the article? They're using your private photos from your camera roll. It is an actual example of what I said. The part I mentioned about public photos was of previously posted photos on Facebook. Please read the article otherwise don't ask for it.
Well, I'm replying to what you're asking and arguing about, as you can tell if you reread our thread. I care about both privacy and intellect property. Shouldn't be that hard to grasp. Also, you've just been asking questions and assuming my point of view without ever stating your own stance. Do you believe it's fine for AI companies to use your personal data and your intellect property to train models they'll profit from without your consent?
If you want to resort to ad hominem we can say good day and move on, that's not the point of discussing things here. At least not for me. If you'd like to answer my question about what is contradictory about enforcing wealth taxes and protecting IP at the same time, I'm all ears.
THE MONNESS takes skill and dedication