Why are people here saying things like "everyone will use chatgpt"? How do we know that this isn't a fad?
Chatgpt gives us answers, but so do the top linked articles in a search engine. Why bother adjusting to something different if we already have something that solves the problem?
For most people, the marginal amount of time saved by using chatgpt instead of a search engine is borderline meaningless. It might be useful for lawyers to quickly tl;dr dry legal documents, but general use seems far fetched to me
> I mean we allowed the alphabet agencies to cooperate with social media companies to fight "ISIS propaganda." -- what did you think would happen?
I remember thinking earlier, it's kind of odd that teenagers "running off to join ISIS" was a widespread problem. In hindsight the shills probably blew that whole thing out of proportion to justify more agency scope creep
This whole issue revolves around how comfortable people are with DC sticking its nose in social media
These agencies have already seen massive scope creep in the past couple decades. Seeing the FBI doing moderation for social media companies is a step too far and it's high time for the alphabet agencies to get pared down
> It does not take a genius to figure out that expensive end of life care paid with taxpayer funds and the country’s labor resources could instead be going towards things like education or infrastructure
There's enough surplus in any western society that this sort of zero sum thinking is completely out of place. Anyone who would consciously sacrifice another human being for something inanimate like "infrastructure" is sick in the head
> What worries me is that the US itself will go in the same direction. The surveillance is already there, but it is not acted on for the most part in everyday life. But there may be a clock on how long that will last.
The stage is already set. Just make sure your suitcase is packed. The craziness won't come from the government, it'll come from this culture's own inherently fascist tendencies
> Should I not have the freedom to organize a protest of my local theater for hosting a controversial figure that I think is worthy of cancellation? Isn't that a very basic and fundamental example of free speech?
Perhaps it isn't about freedom of speech but centralization of power. Protest all you want, but if you advocate for the centralization of power in government or corporate hands then you shouldn't complain when you can't protest anymore without getting the same treatment Chinese protestors are receiving
> I think this is hard wired to us. We want to be told what reality is by people or groups with clout, people who are cool and have prestige, and we're hard-wired to just believe it.
I don't buy this. It isn't something that comes from a small group of people "with status" but is a collective tradition. The idea that a small group of people "with status" can just willy nilly describe what's "real" and what isn't is a fundamentally undemocratic way of seeing society
The idea that some people have a right to manufacture "reality" out of thin air comes from the same set of lies that propped up the Catholic church. Compare this the idea that each person has a unique relationship with God and doesn't need a priestly class to "mediate" the relationship
If the "social harmony" can't handle the light of day, then it is the one that will need to adjust
I'm sick to death of seeing these corporations pretending to care about human rights, then doing stuff like this
Or pretending to care about the environment, then forcing people to buy new devices (with packaging) instead of repairing the ones they already own
Or pretending to care about privacy, then scanning local files for "undesirable content" (it doesn't matter what the content is, once the infra is there, it's there to stay)
If there's one thing I've learned, it's that whenever a corporation says something that sounds good, it's probably a lie.
The only thing that will ever force Apple's hand with regard to this human rights issue is legislation, they've lost the right to trust long ago
> I assume this is about Foxconn. Does that mean you'll be boycotting other companies that also work with them, like Amazon, Dell, Google, HP, Intel, Microsoft, Vizio, Acer, Lenovo, Nintendo, and Sony?
It would be easier to just ban them with legislation, similar to what's been done with Huawei
why is it called constant time if it isn't constant with respect to array length? Just seems confusing because the algorithm is linear without a short circuit