wtf? why is everyone turning techbro all of a sudden even those who are supposed to be more knowledgeable on such stuff. Oh right because there is a bubble to sustain.
This statement seems like it could easily evolve to a profit generating mechanism. It surely will be used to train their AI extensions which is one to start with. They could also claim that selling your browsing habits in an anonymized way to private companies for personalized ads is also part of the better experience goal above. Very vague statement. They are very clear on how they will own your usage statistics but not so clear on what they will be doing with it. Which really makes their aim quite clear. If there is anyone who is legally bound by this statement, it is the user who cant complain about their private data being monopolized and even sold (Firefox owns it %100 apparently). Anything legally binding for Firefox? No not even a promise. They can do whatever the hell they want with your data as long as they follow some basic laws I suppose. And the claim about better interaction is just some feel good words to calm people reading that statement. As in chrome most of this can likely be turned off which I will. But forcing these as default settings down someone's throat is like assuming a %50 tip by default and expecting the customer to change it.
They most probably are. Whenever there is high uncertainty in prices, producers will maximise profit by selling everything at the upper limit and use something like "safety buffer" or "restocking at a more expensive rate" bla as a bullshit excuse. Has been happening in Turkey for the last five years basically across every daily household product range and hospitality sector.
For sure, about %90 of them voted No to Sander's stop weapon sale to Israel resolution. They are worthless pieces of shits which would switch to the republican party at the blink of an eye had they thought their position in the Democrat party was insecure.
If I thought that the democrat party was the only viable option to defeat Trump would I vote for democrats instead of say, voting a third party? Without a second of doubt, yes. We don't even need to debate whether the Democrat party is marginally better than the Republican party or not. The main important difference is that if Trump wins (which he did) half of the country is going to cheer for every vile shit he does (which they do) and this will enable them to carry this vile shit into their personal lives (which they also do).
On the other hand if Kamala were to do such vile shit (granted there is imo %0 chance she could be this worse on almost all matters) at least she would get booed by the people who voted for her. There is a very big difference between how much these reactions enable a president to do even more extreme shit or not and whether if people are encouraged to replicate such behaviour on a local level or not.
So instead of waiting until the last 90 days and then suddenly going "DON'T VOTE FOR DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICANS LETS CHANGE THE COURSE OF HISTORY WOHOO", start working from now to make the third options more viable. Then it will be more sincere and useful.
I mean I understand that Zelensky is desperate and doing whatever is necessary to ensure the fair survival of his country.
But the UK getting in line to kiss his dihheriacious ass, only to get humiliated by this fucking high school bully? Have some spine you fucking cowards. But I guess they meet in the common factor of enabling genocide for Zionists so they never will.
I already don't use airbnb but booking.com? Almost all holidays. That would be really hard to replace. Does anyone have any alternatives (other than directly calling the hotels obv)? I guess one could atleast minimally search from booking.com and then first check if the hotels you are interested in have their own online reservation systems. But it will probably be much less guaranteed than booking.com and one could easily end up with a holiday ruined and a mere apology for "making a reservation mistake"
It is indeed a complicated problem with many intertwined variables, wouldn't wanna be in the shoes of policy makers (assuming that they actually are searching for an honest solution and not trying to turn this into profit lol).
For instance too much regulation on fields like this essentially would kill high quality open source AI tools and make most of them proprietary software leaving the field in the mercy of tech monopolies. This is probably what these monopolies want and they will surely try to push things this way to kill competition (talk about capitalism spurring competition and innovation!). They might even don the cloak of some of these bad actors to speed up the process. Given the possible application range of AI, this is probably even more dangerous than flooding the internet with revenge porn.
%100 freedom, no regulations will essentially lead to a mixed situation of creative and possibly ground breaking uses of the tech vs many bad actors using the tech for things like scamming, disinformation etc. how it will balance out on the long run is probably very hard to predict.
I think two things are clear, 1-both extremities are not ideal, 2- between the two extremities %100 freedom is still the better option (the former just exchanges many small bad actors for a couple giant bad actors and chokes any possible good outcomes).
Based on these starting with a solution closer to the "freedom edge" and improving it step by step based on results is probably the most sensible approach.
Fair enough, I agree it is common to go for more authoritative figures during times of stress. Which also creates incentive for authoritative figures to keep the stress factors going. But I think there is also some innate desire in humans to worship powerful figures.
iAvicenna @ iAvicenna @lemmy.world Posts 0Comments 2,154Joined 2 yr. ago