I hate the term and the fact it became widespread. Unfortunately, mass adoption also means it will mutate and evolution will follow its course.
The obvious solution on X’s side is to ID everyone that wants to post anything. And remember that the obvious solution doesn’t have to be the best solution, a good solution or, even, a real solution at all.
I’m from Brazil and a little confused. What I found is that people in the US pay for a software that simplify the process of filing taxes. Free options would be more difficult or inconvenient. But I also read it is already possible to file taxes for free, as people are eligible, which I can’t wrap my head around.
Here, as fast as I can remember, the only software comes from the government, from the time of floppy disks (provided free of charge) and Java. You can always pay a company to do that for you, but it’s so simple for the majority that we are basically consenting with the use or validating the information they already had.
Maybe people are not really choosing, just going with the only option they know/ remember. If they have to choose from a menu, the first option is very likely and I imagine randomness would be involved.
“If you have an outcome-based approach and you do not reach the goals, then you have to apply additional measures […] whereas now you say okay, I tried, but unfortunately, it didn’t turn out the way I wanted to,” Paulus explained.
Politicians and producers love good ideas that will attract the public’s attention, but should be tweaked just enough to not be executed as intended.
The problem with tipping not being an extra is that one theoretically ends up paying the waiter’s salary directly without being in a direct work relation with them. The restaurant pays people to be there, the clients pay the people to provide a service, the restaurant doesn’t share their profits with their employees, the clients are pressured to decide how much of that profit should be shared and generate that number on the side.
It’s the old two categories being exploited and pitied against each other.
He was, uh, totally asking for it.
I’ll admit that I got confused. If you visit the site, the article is a response to the research that says women also hit men. I’d argue they simply chose stories of men beating women, flipped the gender and wanted people to be outraged.
I’ve never played any of the games, but I would understand that Link is a silent character that uses sign language.
Telegram is the same. It’s the app people will migrate to because it’s the app people learned to use when WhatsApp can’t operate for some reason. Not many people there. People here are overly attached.
For the people who suggest users just change apps. Imagine I just ban all your current forms of text communication (you can still have e-mail), but only you, your family and friends will keep their ecosystems. Do you care you won’t talk to them anymore? Can you convince them to use a new app? Does it affect your life beyond social interactions? Is it worth making your life harder?
The article didn’t go in the direction I expected. Theoretically, open source software can be fixed by experts outside of the main company, but it would be very niche. The expert would need to be familiar with the specific hardware at least, have varying degrees of medical knowledge and have access to the individual in need in some cases.
Forced updates and treating medical software as no more special than a game is the problem when dealing with apps. Tag medicals apps and make it so that system updates have to be manual or go through warnings before being deployed. Offer the option to go back to a version that previously worked. Create regulations to make companies liable for malfunctions.
Daily quests, login rewards, any other mechanic that wants to dictate when I should play, all that ruined my relation with a lot of games. I actively try to ignore them nowadays. If my line of reasoning is I should play a little more because the reward is around the corner and will be gone tomorrow, I’ll let the most precious opportunity go to waste to protect my mental health.
The airlines keep saying that they will make sure the staff follow the policies instead of providing training to avoid negative bias. The policy they talk about is one that changed because of racial bias (asking for medical license). The doctor of the article only had their license at hand because they had recently talked to the doctor who was previously profiled and motivated the change in policy.
No, that’s just racist. That’s something to remember when you argue with someone like that.
The problem that I see is that power comes in great part from the responsibility to educate yourself. In a community, you don’t have to know everything to contribute to its workings, but someone has, enough people do you escape the clutches of external players. Everything is quite individualist right now though. Things must just work without the help of anyone.
They can block access to the site if they don’t comply. Then people use VPN.
I don’t think it’s the same concern. It’s not that people will become pedophiles or act on it more because of the normalization and exposure. It’s people will see less of a problem with the sexualization of children. The parallel being the amount of violence we are OK being depicted. The difference being we can only emulate in a personal level the sexual side.
Maybe there’s the argument that violence is escapist, sexual desire is ever present and porn is addictive.
That’s really curious. LLM were usually on the other side of this note and not considered the traditional AI people referred to.
I think submitting the whole article will put the instance in danger of copyright strikes.
You gotta love when they say “average” or “reasonable”. Average people can judge their own lives, reasonable people can talk about subjects they are interested and have studied in some capacity, a random person who wouldn’t be asked to decide if a work has any serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value in normal circumstances can’t be an arbiter of the law.