This may be a controversial opinion, but I think instances and communities should just ban people for acting in bad faith. There’s very little actual insightful discussion that you can have without someone trying to just win some unilateral debate with some really obnoxious comments. I hate seeing people arguing and being rude all over the place.

I try my best to be the change I want to see in the world, but it’s really tough sometimes to try and stay positive and constructive when you’re just enduring endless personal insults

Yeah, lemmy.world has way too many communities and users for the good of Lemmy’s health, really.

Thank you for bringing it back online, I was worried it might be down for a while! Welcome back :)

Nice to meet everyone by the way, I’m new to SDF, just getting to grips with stuff.

Out of curiosity, have you actually spoken to blind people about how useful they find Braille?

We need to stop expecting change to come from our rulers. We need to take change into our own hands.

Israeli lebensraum, not Jewish. Conflating Judaism with Israel is anti-semitic.

You can’t vote to end the genocide. Democracy isn’t real.

This doesn’t really make sense. Programmers are usually just paid a salary. My salary is the same regardless of how many subscribers there are. I don’t give a shit. If everyone started pirating everything it wouldn’t really impact my job. There’s plenty of dev work to do.

Free video sharing platforms are basically not viable as a business model. For a free and open internet to succeed, YouTube has to fail. At the moment, it only exists because Google subsidises it.

The ideal way for video sharing to work is for large content creators to set up their own federated video hosting websites (or pay for someone else to do it for them) and potentially offer some small amount of free capacity for those who want to upload small, not-for-profit videos

Fact checkers are all just self-important opinion columnists.

I wouldn’t say they did a bad job. They achieved their goals.

Anthropology tends to support the fact that women and men pretty much all had equal share of pretty much every task in the palaeolithic and neolithic eras.

You shouldn’t just reject scientific advances because it goes against what you learned at school. What you learned was wrong. Science adapts based on new evidence. You can too.

Hehe, I know, I’m just being silly - the /s on my message means it’s in a sarcastic tone :) but thanks for taking the time to share that video!

It kind of depends on your perspective, I wouldn’t say they profit from it monetarily - they definitely make a significant loss in raw $ from free users, but there is some amount of beneficial optics for the company, if people use it for fun/harmless activity.

I think we both want the same thing. I don’t want to tone police you or any of that shit, and I believe you’re totally justified in how you feel about AI, but I really do hope you have a read of my comments from the perspective of someone who agrees with you rather than someone who is trying to pick a fight with you.

First of all, most AI tools have some free tier. I doubt the other commenter paid a penny.

Also, just because they did it, it doesn’t mean they “required” it… I’ve laughed at cat videos before, that doesn’t mean that I require cat videos to be amused.

Fair enough, thank you for your time.

I completely disagree with you - ultimately, it’s about power and control - hence, fascism. Hitler’s motivations very clearly went beyond personal wealth. You don’t exterminate people for profit, you do it for ideological reasons. If you want profit, you enslave people in for-profit prisons.

Clearly, their intent was to provide an example of a relatively harmless use of AI as a way of demonstrating to you that your position may have been a bit reductive.

Your reaction, of behaving like, lets be honest, a bit of an asshole, wasn’t really warranted.

Can you seriously not imagine how a corporation could benefit from generative AI, or are you just being obstinate and saying it’s useless because you think it’s unethical and you hope that by saying it’s useless that you can effectively manifest that?

Because there are plenty of use-cases for generative AI. None of them have to be good, or even products. Your phone machine example is a good one - it’s not a product, really, it’s taking the role of a human to fulfil some obligation, or to intentionally make it harder for people to add to the company’s support burden.

I think there are some useful applications for generative AI, but I do agree that the incarnations we have are unethical. And again, I really don’t think that simply telling people that they’re bad people for using it is going to win them over to your side.