‘Not supporting a genocide’ is not a candidate running for election.
Nobody here wants to support genocide. It’s not brave statement, it’s fucking common sense. But the options are ‘a guy who’s weakly attempting to deescalate things’ and ‘hurry up and finish your genocide already’. If you truly don’t want to support genocide, there’s a clear pick.
How do you have so much time to spend on this website trying to convince people not to vote? How does someone so passionately stand for absolutely nothing? I’ve seen these same posts from you over and over and over again, yet you never actually have anything to say besides ‘both sides bad, don’t vote.’
If you have a better option, I’d love to hear it. But if not, maybe shut the fuck up and quit turfing for Trump.
Obviously, most of Mega’s traffic is piracy, they have no interest in doing that. The point is it’s an actual comparison instead of the nonsense you brought up.
Of course no individual site is going to singlehandedly stop criminal acts. Glad you agree it would be exactly as effective as I suggested.
I mean, I know Google has been shitty lately, but Wikipedia isn’t hard to find: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterrence_(penology)
I’d wager Nintendo has put some fear into a few folks considering developing emulators, but that’s the only comparison to be made here. The lack of any real consequences for individuals downloading roms is why so many are happy to publicly proclaim their piracy.
Now, I bet if megaupload added an AI that checked users uploads for copyrighted titles and gave everyone trying to upload them a warning about possible jail time, we’d see a hell of a lot less roms and movies on mega.
But having that tracking shown to you has a very powerful psychological effect.
It’s pretty well established that increasing penalties for crimes does next to nothing to prevent those crimes. But what does reduce crime rates is showing how people were caught for crimes, making people believe that they are less likely to ‘get away with it’.
Being confronted with your own searches is an immediate reminder that the searcher is doing something illegal, and that they are not doing so unnoticed. That’s wildly different than abstractly knowing that you’re probably being tracked somewhere by somebody among billions of other people.
I fully don’t get why people are reacting so much to this. Why the fuck shouldn’t I vote against Biden in the primary? He’s going to be the nominee regardless, this is exactly the time for Democrats to get out those protest votes.
“Most of the time, when people ask me a question, it’s the wrong question and they just didn’t know to ask a different question instead.”
“I’ve tried asking ChatGPT “How do I get the relative path from a string that might be either an absolute URI or a relative path?” It spat out 15 lines of code for doing it manually. I ain’t gonna throw that maintenance burden into my codebase. So I clarified: “I want a library that does this in a single line.” And it found one.”
You see the irony right? I genuinely can’t fathom your intent when telling this story, but it is an absolutely stellar example.
You can’t give a good answer when people don’t ask the right questions. ChatGPT answers are only as good as the prompts. As far as being a “plagiarizing, shameless bullshitter of a monkey paw” I still don’t think it’s all that different from the results you get from people. If you ask a coworker the same question you asked chatGPT, you’re probably going to get a line copied from a Google search that may or may not work.
How is that structurally different from how a human answers a question? We repeat an answer we “know” if possible, assemble something from fragments of knowledge if not, and just make something up from basically nothing if needed. The main difference I see is a small degree of self reflection, the ability to estimate how ‘good or bad’ the answer likely is, and frankly plenty of humans are terrible at that too.
It’s only a ‘fair analogy’ if you’re comparing two things you own. You make videos for Tiktok. They own that content, not you.
My understanding is that the monitor’s job is to report information to the judge, not make decisions for them. Offering up her own accusations of fraud could easily be overstepping her position.
My experience has been the opposite. The boomers think it’s gonna do everything for them, and the young people I know think it’s gonna destroy the world.
The same can be said about any random piece of human created art.
Yeah, seeing how rustled your jimmies are by ai art is pretty damn entertaining. Honestly, could you be any more insecure about it?
So who are you voting for then? You continue to avoid the real question.