This guy gets it.

For me it's just generic influencer dislike. Wouldn't go as far as hate though. It's just that I pre-emptively don't care about what they have to say. Clickbaity titles "this is why..." (without explaining why) certainly don't help.

Full disclosure: I'm only responding at this headline and the blurp posted here. I haven't seen the - oh lord, 3 hours?! - video. But I'm sure it will be very interesting for someone.

Ehm. So?

Just because [bad people group X] think that [bad thing Y] is bad, doesn't mean they're wrong.

There are good reasons to be anti AI (creators rights, for a starter , and at the same time, it's not going to go away, and it will also improve our lives in ways that we cannot fathom right now. It'll need (better) regulation for sure.

Having said that, I really don't think inflammatory posts like these (Y is bad because associated with X) are going make things get better.

If you want to be pedantic about it - if the NSA, or any such agency demands to place a [backdoor of any sort] in an American company's datacenter, they have to comply.

So, no, they (meta, Google, etc) won't be handing over the data knowingly. But those devices placed there for sure aren't running Minecraft servers.

We recognize that our business is critically dependent on sustaining the trust of customers, countries, and governments across Europe. We respect European values, comply with European laws, and actively defend Europe's cybersecurity. Our support for Europe has always been – and always will be – steadfast.

None of that matters, since they still have to comply to American laws, which means they have to give access to European data if the US government requests it.

It's kinda like good guy Hitler, because he killed Hitler.

Trump's major achievement might be that the rest of the world starts relying less on the US.

In other words, clickbait?

That's the kind of nuanced response I expected from lemmy about something becoming less left wing ;)

So... How can you possibly justify that start button?

Yes it is. Although I personally have far less moral objections to it.

To elaborate:
OpenAI scraped data without permission, and then makes money from it.

Deepseek then used that data (even paid openai for it), trained a model on that data, and then releases that model for anyone to use.

While it's still making use of "stolen data" (that's a whole semantics discussion I won't get into right now), I find it far more noble than the former.

I'd say that federation is the core principle of the network, so centralisation by piling all the users and content onto one server is very undesirable.
(also looking at you, lemmy.world)

uh huh-huh.

Because triggered and hate circlejerk.

Yeah, if making money is evil, this guy is worse than Hitler!

Cue.

Oof.
"Why? Because Trump"

Can't wait for these four years to be over. Not because I like him, but because I dislike him being brought up time and again for the sake of engagementbait.

Cars as a service? That might be debatable.

But taking the human factor out of driving cars and trucks is going to save millions of lives worldwide. That's the inevitable safety progress I was talking about in my comment.

It's not just the automotive industry that would be worried, that's incredibly short-sighted. The transport sector, however, should be terrified. The amount of chauffeurs required in a few decades time will be just a few percentage of today's amount.

And that, in turn, will have major ramifications for the social securities (UBI, anyone?)

But sure, let's start with the American car makers, so they can lobby against this inevitable progress in safety.

Meanwhile, in the real world, creators just want to setup an account and sell their content. Not having to deal with payment processors, setting up cdns port handling customer support themselves.

There's enough to complain about how OnlyFans impacts society (like creating fake interactions with customers who think they're interacting with the real deal). But them wanting a cut for doing all the technical middleman stuff is actually reasonable.

No need for these kind of inflammatory comments, the article itself is bad enough.

If you read the article, you would have seen that, yes, the perpetrator is serving a 20 year sentence.