From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free 🇵🇸

  • 0 Posts
  • 74 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 7th, 2023

help-circle


  • The point though is that I ultimately don’t care for wealth. Stocks and indexes would be playing into the same billionaire game that I would be trying to steer away from (albeit an impossible feat to dodge entirely).

    I would probably use it in local governments to provide housing and better shelters for the poor; donate to programs that help children in underrepresented communities; buy materials for schools; contribute to mental health services and police reform (through community-lead programs).



  • I can see that. I’d hope I could offset it by actually dumping my personal funds into working class programs and offer direct relief, but I know it’s a stupid thought exercise. The reality is that I’ve been in tech for years and have always actively avoided FAANG companies, and any and all paths that lead to corporate or management.













  • The author starts off a bit immature in their commentary, but I pushed through and they touch on a simple point that I relate to:

    All of this stuff feels like homework now and Disney and Marvel have pumped out far too much minor stuff that all intertwines in one way or another. I want to like it and I do make exceptions (Loki), but I’m too casual of a comic reader to bother with the remainder of what we have now. Endgame was the cliff where I drove off and lost interest (and to be fair, that’s a pretty big void to fill).

    This movie in particular interests me but mostly because of the cast. I couldn’t tell you much about any of the characters. The reality is that it’s going to be a really hard sell to get surface-level comic enthusiasts and general-superhero-movie-lovers to buy into stories about minor characters they’ve never heard of.



  • There is absolutely zero chance I would allow anyone to theorize what they think I would say using AI. Hell, I don’t like AI in its current state, and that’s the least of my issues with this.

    It’s immoral. Regardless of your relation to a person, you shouldn’t be acting like you know what they would say, let alone using that to sway a decision in a courtroom. Unless he specifically wrote something down and it was then recited using the AI, this is absolutely wrong.

    It’s selfish. They used his likeness to make an apology they had no possible way of knowing, and they did it to make themselves feel better. They couldve wrote a letter with their own voices instead of turning this into some weird dystopian spectacle.

    “It’s just an impact statement.”

    Welcome to the slippery slope, folks. We allow use of AI into courtrooms, and not even for something cool (like quickly producing a 3d animation of a car accident for use in explaining—with actual human voices—what happened at the scene). Instead, we use it to sway a judge’s sentencing, while also making an apology on behalf of a dead person (using whatever tech you want because that is not the main problem here) without their consent or even any of their written (you know, like in a will) thoughts.

    Pointing to “AI bad” for these arguments is lazy, reductive, and not even remotely the main gripe.