They wanted human employees replaced by AI. But wanting responsibility and accountability replaced as well is going a bit too far. Companies should be forced to own up anything that their AI does as if it were an employee. That includes copyright infringement. And if the mistake is one worth firing an employee, then we should demand the management responsible for such mistakes be fired instead.
Imagine the scenario where you have to bribe (disguised as a subscription) each megatech company to respect your privacy. How many times and how much will you be willing to pay for something that should be your fundamental right?
Given Meta's history, no one should misinterpret their intentions. They should be outright banned for these egregious transgressions.
He will always be remembered for his fearless investigations. Especially the one where he conned a Russian agent who had attempted to assassinate him into giving up sensitive information.
It wasn't the simple mobile tools that was sold to zippoapps. It was the privacy of its userbase. SMT would have been worth nothing without that userbase - no matter how its developer wanted to spin it.
Ah! The US! The land where the magnitude of the crime and punishment are decided by how much it offends the super rich! Show that the rich don't pay their fair share? Maximum punishment to be made an example of. Storm the capitol building? Token imprisonment. Gave out dangerously wrong blood test results in the process of defrauding investors? Imprisonment for just defrauding the investors.
Effective Altruism is harmful even without this asshole. For one, it's very naïve to assume that these billionaires are going to just give away their wealth for greater good. Second, it encourages the methods that create wealth inequality to generate the said wealth. Finally, it just allows these cutthroats to assuage the prick of their conscience and the sharpness of criticisms against them.
The OpenBSD devs published a mail about it. The irony here is how Microsoft would behave if anybody else copied their concepts, including the name. The treatment is never symmetric or reciprocal.
The only reason I can think of for anyone opposing covid-19 restrictions is covid-19 denial. While it's true that the restrictions caused mental and emotional distress to the kids, parents would have considered it as a necessary compromise if they took covid-19 seriously.
It isn't inconceivable that there is a great overlap between covid-19 deniers and those who are opposed to diversity. Then why isn't it so? Did I make a mistake in the assumptions I made?
Yes, engineering is all about tradeoffs. But not the ones made by a company with incentives for an unfavorable design. You're arguing against reparability based on the designs of such a company, not based on what could have been done with reparability in mind.
Mastodon has no privacy at all. Even if you host your own instance. People use Mastodon for freedom and to get away from manipulation by corporate social media.
you don’t get to claim that adding a new requirement to a design can definitely be done without sacrificing on weight
This is the 'My argument is right because I say so' argument. You don't get to unilaterally make unsubstantiated claims like that and then preempt the opposition like that.
Your arguments lack technical merit or the support by real world cases. Have you ever stopped to think that such arguments are only made by Apple and their fanbois? Repeating a lie doesn't make it true.
That's completely false. There's no technical basis for this assertion or tradeoff. On the other hand, there are plenty of device manufacturers that prioritize reparability without sacrificing anything.
The only argument is that Apple and Apple fanbois repeat these claims. But they have vested monetary interests in such a design. That's why it's a lie. Agreeing to it just lends credence to Apple abusing their market position. So no.
markedly better than deciding that corporations are people.
Came here to say exactly this. However, remember that corporations are people because it's a way for the executives to escape personal accountability and responsibility for any decision they make. Extending the same logic to nature, personhood is likely to be abused. People would do it since nature won't complain or litigate back.
Do you need that? You only need to sync the feed. There are formats like OPML for that. At worst you need a file sync tool like syncthing. The feed contents seen by the readers are all the same.
I'm yet to see a good reason why feed readers need to be web apps. This is worse than the case of git - a decentralized tool is taken and made centralized.
It isn't an academic project. Its main problem is that there aren't nearly enough developers or resources to achieve what they want - bug-to-bug compatibility with Windows.
They wanted human employees replaced by AI. But wanting responsibility and accountability replaced as well is going a bit too far. Companies should be forced to own up anything that their AI does as if it were an employee. That includes copyright infringement. And if the mistake is one worth firing an employee, then we should demand the management responsible for such mistakes be fired instead.