Boddhisatva @ Boddhisatva @lemmy.world

Posts

13

Comments

2,112

Joined

2 yr. ago

You don't need $10 billion in revenue. You could just coast along and only hit, what, $9.8 billion? And then you wouldn't have to ruin 500 people's lives. I'm betting the CEO has a bonus scheduled if he hits this goal.

Oh look, another court order to ignore.

The bill passed the Senate Committee on Commerce and Tourism 5-4, with one Republican lawmaker, Sarasota Sen. Joe Gruters, joining Democrats in voting against it.

"I think we need to let kids be kids," Gruters said.

Uh oh, somebody's gonna get primaried. How dare he show moral fortitude in public.

If they used illegal means to find him, Im pretty sure that taints any evidence found on him.

Possibly. It's called The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine. If the police obtained evidence illegally, or derived evidence from other evidence that was illegally obtained, it can be ruled inadmissible by the judge. There are exceptions shown in the link. One of the big exceptions is the first listed. If it was discovered from a source independent of the illegal activity it can be allowed.

Police are aware of the risks of tainted evidence so they will sometimes cover for it with a parallel construction investigation.

Parallel construction occurs when the federal government learns of criminal activity through one source but then gives the information to federal law enforcement agencies to “reconstruct” the criminal investigation so that the source of that second investigation differs from the original source.

So, let's say the police arrest a suspect and find compelling evidence against the suspect at the location. That evidence might be suppressed if it turns out that, for example, the police found out where the suspect was going to be via an illegal wire tap. If it weren't for the illegally obtained location information, the police would not have obtained that other evidence. Rather than admitting in court that this is how they found the suspect, one of the investigators might call in, or arrange for someone else to call in an anonymous tip about the suspect's location to other investigators that don't know about the illegal wire tap. The police then exclude the real origin of the knowledge of the suspects location from court filings.

Illegal, very possibly. Likely, also very possible.

Of course it won't. It would take years to move manufacturing to the USA. Building factories, hiring and training workers, none of that can happen over months. It's also a huge expenditure for the business which, along with higher payroll costs, would be passed on to consumers. Costs are going to go up weather they move manufacturing here or not so why not take the path of least resistance and just pass on the tariff costs?

This is more of an indictment about people not being safe while preparing food. Wash the eggs before you crack them into the pan, or whatever. Wash your hands properly any time you touch the shells, yolks or whites. Wash all surfaces that come in contact with the shells, yolks or whites. Cook thoroughly. Do the same when cooking or handling meats or even vegetables that could be contaminated.

Typical Republican: either scared of their own shadow or indifferent to the grievous damage they inflict on others.

I think scared and indifferent to the damage they do is more accurate. Though I'm not even sure it's indifference. I think they actually delight in causing harm to people they believe deserve that harm.

Yikes!

In that sense, Westgate explains, the bot dialogues are not unlike talk therapy, “which we know to be quite effective at helping people reframe their stories.” Critically, though, AI, “unlike a therapist, does not have the person’s best interests in mind, or a moral grounding or compass in what a ‘good story’ looks like,” she says. “A good therapist would not encourage a client to make sense of difficulties in their life by encouraging them to believe they have supernatural powers. Instead, they try to steer clients away from unhealthy narratives, and toward healthier ones. ChatGPT has no such constraints or concerns.”

This is a rather terrifying take. Particularly when combined with the earlier passage about the man who claimed that “AI helped him recover a repressed memory of a babysitter trying to drown him as a toddler.” Therapists have to be very careful because human memory is very plastic. It's very easy to alter a memory, in fact, every time you remember something, you alter it just a little bit. Under questioning by an authority figure, such as a therapist or a policeman if you were a witness to a crime, these alterations can be dramatic. This was a really big problem in the '80s and '90s.

Kaitlin Luna: Can you take us back to the early 1990s and you talk about the memory wars, so what was that time like and what was happening?

Elizabeth Loftus: Oh gee, well in the 1990s and even in maybe the late 80s we began to see an altogether more extreme kind of memory problem. Some patients were going into therapy maybe they had anxiety, or maybe they had an eating disorder, maybe they were depressed, and they would end up with a therapist who said something like well many people I've seen with your symptoms were sexually abused as a child. And they would begin these activities that would lead these patients to start to think they remembered years of brutalization that they had allegedly banished into the unconscious until this therapy made them aware of it. And in many instances these people sued their parents or got their former neighbors or doctors or teachers whatever prosecuted based on these claims of repressed memory. So the wars were really about whether people can take years of brutalization, banish it into the unconscious, be completely unaware that these things happen and then reliably recover all this information later, and that was what was so controversial and disputed.

Kaitlin Luna: And your work essentially refuted that, that it's not necessarily possible or maybe brought up to light that this isn't so.

Elizabeth Loftus: My work actually provided an alternative explanation. Where could these merit reports be coming from if this didn't happen? So my work showed that you could plant very rich, detailed false memories in the minds of people. It didn't mean that repressed memories did not exist, and repressed memories could still exist and false memories could still exist. But there really wasn't any strong credible scientific support for this idea of massive repression, and yet so many families were destroyed by this, what I would say unsupported, claim.

The idea that ChatBots are not only capable of this, but that they are currently manipulating people into believing they have recovered repressed memories of brutalization is actually at least as terrifying to me as it convincing people that they are holy prophets.

Edited for clarity

Here is an article about it.

After three years of wrangling, a decision was reached in court: Fritsch was forced to agree to only use the video if he manipulates the images in such a way that he can't be identified. Despite this, there's a sense that the horse has very much bolted. Fritsch might have been gagged, but there are hundreds of other artists who have made derivative works that will remain online. "It's too late. That's the whole absurdity of the trial."

In addition to censoring the video, Fritsch must pay the plaintiff €8,000 -- the vast majority of the money he made from the video. That's on top of the €7,000 in legal bills. He says that the trial will bankrupt him.

Wikipedia does, or at least as is publicly available.

Yep. Standard playbook.

Who fucking cares? He's an ESPN host that Trump thinks should run for president. Is this the token black the GOP is going to put up in 2028 if they pretend to have primaries?

“I think the kind of impact that I could have as a centrist, as a moderate, as somebody who believes in being sensical and engaging in common sense."

Dear gods, save us from centrists. Sure, you're the guy that can unite the Democrats and Republicans and get them to work together for the betterment of all people. Right.

By the way, "sensical" is not a word you nitwit.

Pressed whether his administration is following the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, which says no person "shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law," Trump said he wasn't sure.

"I don't know. It seems – it might say that, but if you're talking about that, then we'd have to have a million or 2 million or 3 million trials," he said. "We have thousands of people that are some murderers and some drug dealers and some of the worst people on Earth."

It might say that? Might? This isn't something that is debatable you hippopotamic dung heap. That's what it fucking says.

Meanwhile, Reddit’s chief legal officer, Ben Lee, wrote that the company intends to “ensure that the researchers are held accountable for their misdeeds.”

"How dare they perform such dangerous and unethical experiments on our users without paying us an appropriate access fee?" He probably went on to say.

Okay, you've given me an idea. We get Terry Crews to run for president in character as Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho. The left will get the joke and vote for him while the right will think he's really on their side and also vote for him. Then he could just appoint competent (really smart people) as advisors and be a pretty good president.

This would also work with Stephen Colbert dusting off his old conservative personal from The Colbert Report and running for president.

I'm pretty sure it's because he has a hard-on for the gilded age when McKinley was president and virtually all federal income was from tariffs rather than income tax. Trump wants to get rid of income tax altogether, for what I trust are obvious reasons, and replace that revenue with taxation on those who buy products, meaning tariffs. Rich people and corporations will pay essentially no taxes at all, but if you want to buy a car, an appliance, a home, or even food, the price will be jacked up to cover the tariffs he's implementing.

It was the Gilded Age, a time of rapid population growth and transformation from an agricultural economy toward a sprawling industrial system, when poverty was widespread while barons of phenomenal wealth, like John D. Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan, held tremendous sway over politicians who often helped boost their financial empires.

“We were at our richest from 1870 to 1913. That’s when we were a tariff country. And then they went to an income tax concept,” Trump said days after taking office. “It’s fine. It’s OK. But it would have been very much better.”

The ene­my is both strong and weak. "By a con­tin­u­ous shift­ing of rhetor­i­cal focus, the ene­mies are at the same time too strong and too weak." - Umberto Eco List of the 14 Common Features of Fascism

Biden is a doddering old fool but at the same time is also a powerful mastermind still managing to wreck the economy despite being out of office.

Sometimes, but look at Speaker Johnson and his son, monitoring each other's porn habits. Only the penises at the top of the religious hierarchy get the pass.

Yep, hence my statement that there are only about half a dozen in all of Congress that support it.