DoPeopleLookHere @ DoPeopleLookHere @sh.itjust.works

Posts

0

Comments

134

Joined

5 mo. ago

If it quacks like transphobia and it promotes transphobia.....

I love how you chose an example I literally can't control like taxes.

And your right, I can't pick and choose every single thing. But you better believe there's a lot of media I won't enjoy because of actors either. Tom Cruise being one.

Intent matters. But when a community tells you hey, this action, that you could easily not not do, is harmful to me and my community.

Yes I do judge you for that choice.

Excuse me while for not caring about the difference when all the same, the money is still harming my community.

Except for the fact that the money spent on the movie directly funds transphobia via JK Rowling....

You get she's literally doing that right?

They're not saying it's transphobic, but it is promoting transphobia. Which isn't really any better in my books.

You know the slippery slope fallacy right?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

Flooding the market with rentals still lowers rental prices?

Also if there's more housing than renters, some will have to start selling to avoid the taxes.

How is that a not in my back yard?

It's not a matter of the state taking over things, the federal government is (hypothetically) stopping those funds regardless of what they do, so why wouldn't they fund it themselves because all those things you mentioned still need to happen.

Saw a post saying the owner does plan to fix it, but it's a problem he can't fix remotely, and is out of town in work for a while, so it may be a few weeks before it's fixed.

Little bit more.

Someone made 3 servers, then a bunch of accounts on those servers, then used all of those accounts to downvote.

Allegedly because I ain't got the time to manually verify that myself.

What are you talking about?

It was never AI. It was always cheap remote people working in foreign countries. But you would take that, and sell it as AI like they did?

All they had to do was run the tech alongside traditional cashiers. Make it known on entry, and your fine. No ethical concerns.

But what they did was sell tech they didnt have to shareholders to pump up the stock.

LTT be like....

Sure, but you still shouldn't be selling the technology as actually working, instead of developing.

Amazon bought whole foods a while back. What would have stopped them from just collecting the data in their own stores, and then developed the tech?

Hint: shareholder value.

Your study has no control. So how do we know that's the best way to get more out of people? The page linked doesn't even specify what job types.

I'd still wager they'd be better served by better applications, not AI.

Also not the same person.

Forced overtime comes to an easier, cheaper mind.

But how better done depends on the field. Me, having a faster computer reduces compile time. So NOT having AI overhead on my machine is more important.

People could get tons of flows improved by not abusing Excell as a database.

I don't know, there's a lot of racism and anti-Semitism in those books as well. I mean the money obsessed long nose goblins? Cho Chang?

They're good stories, but they do reflect the work of a fundamentally biggoted author.

That also has nothing to do with the video at hand.