Every time I hear something about Netflix I always wonder how it is even still running. Still wild to me that they had the entire monopoly on streaming and fucked it up anyways.
Nowadays everybody wants to talk like they got something to say but nothing comes out when they move their lips just a bunch of gibberish.
Every time I hear something about Netflix I always wonder how it is even still running. Still wild to me that they had the entire monopoly on streaming and fucked it up anyways.
I have a feeling if we ever get to speaking with whales they are going to have a lot of words for us.
How is character.ai responsible for the suicide of someone clearly in need of mental health help?
Facebook doesn’t hand out your personal information to others, and if you think they do, then you don’t understand how targeted ads work.
It is explicitly stated in the TOS that Meta does indeed hand out your personal information to others.
If you think they don't, read the TOS.
To be fair it drives on its own. Off cliffs, into walls and other vehicles, while seemingly targeting pedestrians BUT it does drive on its own. haha
...against a backdrop of questions about Joe Biden’s mental sharpness.
How to spot a worthless article 101:
Step 1: It includes absolutely irrelevant information designed to push a narrative at all times.
Step 2: It was published by "The Guardian".
I enjoy this narrative of "being forced" to go against ones own morals and principals by big bad companies because one just absolutely has to have a product for as cheap as possible.
You went to two stores and then straight to Amazon. That doesn't mean they have a monopoly, that means you really didn't try that hard to find an alternative.
If you think you have no other choice you are right because you stopped looking for one.
Citations needed lmao. I’m pretty sure computer vision has recognized “objects” for decades. It’s a military tool for murdering non-yts with drones, etc.
Your "pretty sure" is not worth a lot considering how clearly you displayed your ignorance in 3 sentences.
Search engines exist for a reason. If you search "computer vision" you will see very clearly it has not been functional, especially battle field ready, for "decades" as you claimed without citation while demanding citations.
"non-yts" eh? Too afraid to spell the word "white" or what?
Honestly, do a little research and maybe a little soul searching before sharing your opinions with the world. Might be more meaningful for everyone involved.
We should be more concerned that "Consultant" is an actual job.
No need for. Solar panels and batteries are at an historically low price and will even become more affordable. There’s simply no economical justification for nuclear energy.
How many solar panels and batteries are needed to power every electrical grid on the planet?
Where do we locate all of the panels and batteries?
Where do we get all of the materials for all of the panels and batteries?
What is the total cost to operate and maintain that global power grid?
What is the lifespan of the grid?
What happens to all of the panels and batteries at end of life, and how much does it cost?
It still is.
The proof is reference to China. Just like if one were to say we should stop technological collaboration with India that would be enough.
Considering both Governments are notorious for reverse engineering things they only have on the condition they wouldn't reverse engineer it, both Governments are actively hostile to the "west", and both Governments are actively helping a war criminal get his hands on things he shouldn't I think it is safe to say no one needs much more of a reason other than a history book to say "Maybe we shouldn't be trading and collaborating with hostile nations".
No they screwed the pooch hard in the beginning. They could have bought up rights to basically everything for pennies compared to what it is worth now because of the leverage they had before any of those media publishers had options elsewhere.
Netflix was literally in the position to tell them what the price was back then and now they have nothing to bargain with because the market is saturated.
You should work on your spelling and grammar before acting like an authority.
I agree with you there. The second hand market is wonderful for finding ridiculous deals on things people just want gone.
The only problem with the second hand market is the effort needed for it. That effort keeps people from considering it a viable option for goods in the same way the effort to find another store made OP B-line to Amazon.
The content creators freedom to express directly opposes the hosts freedom of affiliation. Not that I want to defend either company but they do have the right to say what is and is not allowed in their spaces using the same idea of "fundamental human rights".
It is either that or we have to agree that "fundamental human rights" cannot exist because one groups rights can override the other on social whim.
Every other creator on the planet has to abide by these rules if they want to remain on these platforms and every creator has an option not to use them.
Care to explain how Reddit shitting the bed impacts your ability to eat?
Define "discriminate".
What makes you think an AGI wouldn't need our species in some way?
I love how it is all about what Israel should and shouldn't do with the drones, while directly citing Russia's Genocide against Ukrainians, without ever calling for Russia to stop. I guess Ukrainian Women, Children, and the elderly have the wrong colour and faith for anyone to give a fuck.
Never claimed to be an authority. And being a grammar Nazi isnt an argument based in logic, its sidestepping any substance for the sole purpise of being a right old cunt.
It is not "being a grammar nazi" to point out your complete lack of ability regarding the English language. That is what is commonly known as an "observation". If you want to be observed differently change what is observable.
As an example, you observe me as "a right old cunt" and I am doing nothing to change that observation. In fact, it was my intent from go to be observed that way by you.
Thank the gods you rolled higher in perception than you did in intelligence or you may not have caught on so quickly.
More time than effort on my part. You know you have nothing going on when interacting with a person like that is a reasonable way to kill time. lol
I'm not sure they ever will realize that. We probably wound up being posted on some anti drug prohibition forum with a "see what I have to deal with?" title and a lot of circle jerking. haha
I find this comment funny.
Is there major platform that is not a hot bed of bigotry?
People were playing around with electricity in ancient Greece as well. (Electricity coming from the word for amber, even). But if you asked someone “when electricity was invented”, I’m sure you wouldn’t even think of anything before 1600.
"The word comes from the Greek elektron (“amber”); the Greeks discovered that amber rubbed with fur attracted light objects such as feathers. Such effects due to stationary charges, or static electricity, were the first electrical phenomena to be studied."
https://www.britannica.com/summary/electricity
Here is something to help you in understanding more about the topic of magnetism, static electricity, and what the ancient Greeks were talking about regarding both.
https://worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/9789813223776_0001
I am curious why you believe any of that is relevant to a discussion about Anti-drug propaganda.
I’ve spoken to thousand of people about this. That isn’t anecdotal
Yes it is. Literally the definition of "anecdotal".
anecdotal, Adjective, "Based on casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis."
You are free to provide your study about the thousand individuals you interviewed with the same questions regarding anti-drug propaganda to demonstrate it is in fact not anecdotal.
If you’re honestly interested, you can find tons of literature.
Name 10 books on the subject including the authors.
Did you ever stop to think that the propaganda you speak of is directly influenced by exactly what steeznson was speaking about?
Why do you believe that anti-drug propaganda only began in the 20th century?
Do you have anything other than wikipedia links to back your stance up? Say, a real study done on the impacts of anti-drug propaganda through the ages which demonstrates that the 20th century was the most militant with it?
Do you know what Religion is, and its impacts on anti-drug mentalities predating the 20th century?
Feel free to actually answer my questions, and try to keep personal attacks like this
And are you a bit thick if you’re saying that these attitudes have always been with humans
out of it.
You’re not aware of prohibitions and now surrendered your whole “do you think there weren’t any drug prohibitions before the 20th century” point, because I actually know the topic, and you don’t.
Logical Fallacy.
… unless I actually did it systemically and collected results, which I have done. Amateurish, yes, but still not casual. Would you like to see my files? They’re in Finnish, with my own notation about what people respond with. It’s honestly baffling how small the options are for people, and how they all think they’re actually making a point, with some idiotic bullshit like “I don’t want my doctor operating on me while they’re on drugs” or some other completely ridiculous propaganda bullshit from some “Just Say No” campaign. I could draw a flowchart on an A4, wouldn’t even need an A3, lol.
Oh look more logical fallacy with a heavy sprinkle of personal attack. I have a purple unicorn, but I cannot show it to you. Just trust me.
First let me say that everyone knows you’re trying to set impossible goals, because you know you don’t have a leg to stand on in this debate, so you think a number you pull out your arse means anything, but I will give you literature on the subject, as requested, because I’ve actually fucking studied this for probably longer than you’ve been alive, despite you thinking I haven’t and am some random druggie — something which is all too common when you bring up the subject. People like you get what are essentially panic attacks when asked to question the propaganda programmed into their heads. It must be a horrible feeling, when being asked a question you’ve just claimed to be 100% sure about, to realise that you don’t actually have any reasons to believe what you believe and that you have no idea why you believe it, but you do know that you MUST NOT QUESTION IT.
Everyone knows I am setting impossible goals?
Here are 254 results for books regarding "Drug prohibition".
People like me? You don't know anything about me. It would help if you responded in good faith by answering the questions posed, and maybe asking some of your own.
Honestly the logical fallacy and personal attacks have become quite tiresome.
If you’re defending the prohibition of drugs, you’re either ignorant on the subject, or you’re actively supporting organized crime / making money off the situation. Literally. There is no other alternative. You’re in the group which is ignorant of it, because you’re brainwashed to even avoid information on the subject.
Show me where I said I support drug prohibition. Also, more logical fallacy.
Now, since I’ve more or less done what you’ve asked and answered your points, how about you stop ignoring my rhetoric and extend me the same courtesy? So… ANY science at all that says that drug prohibition is actually doing what it’s supposed to? Any science at all saying decriminalisation/legalisation is bad for society? ANY at all? Oh there isn’t? Not ONE? Wow, I’m so shocked, if only I could’ve seen this coming, eh?
I think I have explicitly demonstrated how you have not answered a single question, and fell back on logical fallacy and personal attacks numerous times. I never made a claim in support of drug prohibition.
You are not worth any further time. Feel free to write another novel in the comments.
Fair warning, it will be ignored.
Whatever you say. People who don't hate or wish to hurt others over how they were born generally don't have to keep telling everyone about it. Sounds like a lot of over compensation and projection to me.
Food for thought.
Weird how you only tell me to stop while everyone else goes off.
Ironic, considering where this conversation is happening.
I am not sure if you meant it as such, but that was a great burn. haha
I absolutely empathize with the "Bullheaded, everyone is wrong but me" teenage mentality as well. Especially that mentality mixed with unfettered access to the internet.
Age sure does wear it thin though. haha
Perhaps it doesn’t matter, because you didn’t ask in good faith, and are just a thrashy pseudointellectual kid who’s pretending to argue a thing they know nothing about, while thinking writing “fallacy” means something, while pretending their implications don’t exist.
You just have to reply, but you can’t address anything
Pot calling the kettle black much?
Nothing is stopping you from not replying.
The term is an actual job. "I'm" your work, that person is being paid to tell you what to do and not do the job they have years of experience in. Not sure what your field is, but your understanding of a job that you do not do is lacking.
That’s a bit like saying “I can’t be racist, I’m black”. I know there are people who believe it, but it doesn’t make it true, does it?
Actually it is a bit like saying you threw a tantrum over questions you couldn't answer and assumed I was pro drug prohibition because of it.
You know what they say about assuming right?
I answered your points, but all you keep doing is larping an intellectual. Why did you ask for 10 books on the subject? Because you wanted to know if the situation is as I say it is. I link a book saying it definitely is. You have a tantrum.
You haven't answered my questions, as I wasn't making points.
That is another failure of perception based on your defensive demeanor, caused by the aforementioned tantrum and assumptions. The amount of projection and mental gymnastics you are doing to make me out to be you is humorous.
So you definitely agree that the prohibition of all drugs has to be lifted, for the good of society?
No, I don't agree that the prohibition of all drugs has to be lifted for the good of society. Just like I do not agree that prohibition of all drugs must be in place for the good of society. Both statements are equally asinine.
What I do believe is drugs should be available for use by consenting adults in a heavily regulated market coupled with intense social safety nets to deal with drug use related problems.
Edit this thread is a case in point. Not one single explanation, just people absolutely terrified out of their minds, parroting bad propaganda and even worse rhetoric. “I don’t want my surgeon tripping when he’s operating on me.” And I don’t want my surgeon drunk, and alcohol is legal, and I’ve never had the issue, because surgeons don’t come to work drunk.
Genuinely, I’m tired of answering these “arguments” and no-one will accept how afraid they are, even when not a single soul can explain why.
This edit is hilarious as well. Made especially funny by the fact that no one is arguing for drug prohibition.
You got an answer to your question "Why is society so afraid of people purposefully altering their mental state? (In terms of cannabis, psychedelics, anything "mind-expanding.)", and me asking you questions.
Not once was a pro prohibition argument made against you, yet you keep hammering that nail like everyone is against you.
You should address the victim mentality, need to attack and demean others to make points, and inability to listen to another persons point if you want to have more success communicating with others.
I would bet good money on this having come up in the conversation as a "valid" argument. Mother fuckers probably gave the guy a standing ovation. haha
I stand by everything I have said. Made clear by the lack of editing done.
Maybe stop quoting me out of context. You may understand why you are wrong.
I am high as Giraffe pussy right now.
Your argument is invalid.
There are over 8 billion people on the planet and Netflix is an international company. If they decided to not fuck around and find out they could have had the majority of that market for pennies and held it well past today.
They had the monopoly on a golden platter and fucked it up. If they were smart they would have cemented that position.
When does a platform cross the line between "group of people making money hosting other peoples content" to "fake corporate 'people'"? Does everyone working in any corporation automatically lose their rights?
In order to use any service provided by Meta one has to already have their head in the sand and pants around their ankles.
Asking for mindfulness in the face of the latest "moral dilemma" posed by Meta is simply not something the user base seems capable of.