Citizens United suggests to me that these businesses are acting as legal persons in this case, choosing when and how they allocate money. Persons can collude to boycott.
Citizens United did not overturn the general body of antitrust law...
Readit Newsyanderekko commented on YouTube experimenting with server-side ad injection fosstodon.org/@sponsorblo... · Posted by u/judiisis
I have to wonder if they never have due to fear that people will stop using the platform. I honestly will stop using it. I don't mind ads, but they always come on YouTube at the worst time, if you're watching something informative, they cut your brain off from that into some obscure that has no relevancy to your life.
Why would they fear people who adblock leaving the platform?
yanderekko commented on Sam and Greg's response to OpenAI Safety researcher claims twitter.com/gdb/status/17... · Posted by u/amrrs
Tf is the risk of generating erotica?
Deepfakes?
the other side of this.
more people will be able to create their own animated films without requiring studios, execs and all the gatekeeping and bs that comes with that.
that's why i think the future really will be in content curation.
unless these companies can find a way to block the average person from having access to the same level tools. which i think they will try and they probably can to some extent.
Yep. Maybe there will be a net reduction in jobs but I can't help but feel like catastrophic 90% reductions involve "lump of labor"-type fallacies where we just imagine taking the given set of work being done and imagine how much of that will be handled via AI vs. humans in 5 or 10 years or whatever.
When the reality is that good AI tools will cause lots of projects to add video content where it wasn't before, or to spend more time creating high-quality video content. And this will undoubtedly involve some new labor.
yanderekko commented on Reddit signs $60M content licensing deal with AI company reuters.com/technology/re... · Posted by u/tonystubblebine
Agreeing to write content for free to participate in a community is one thing.
How many Reddit users knew they were agreeing in the future for Reddit to sell the content they wrote to make money for Reddit, not them?
> no redditor expects to see a dime when they participate on the site and the site makes money form it.
Plenty of Redditors would disagree with you, and I'm not sure why you're acting like this is obvious. If I hadn't already deleted all my content and left because of the last debacle, I would be doing so for this.
>How many Reddit users knew they were agreeing in the future for Reddit to sell the content they wrote to make money for Reddit, not them?
Despite my low opinion of Redditors, I believe that on some level they are aware of the principle that if the product is free, then you are the product.
If you presented the regular users with the choice between "pay a subscription fee and opt out or let us use your data in these ways", the vast majority will end up choosing the latter and we all know it.
Deleted Comment
yanderekko commented on To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use nytimes.com/2023/12/11/us... · Posted by u/mikhael
You will note of course that the rules and regulations around how to implement these things are always 'bipartisan' and meant to stir up as little backlash as possible. There's many opportunities to install bottlenecks and roadblocks in systems that end up shaping the entire way they function. To some extent it is progressives anticipating conservative backlash but there's plenty of lines in plenty of laws written into and insisted on by conservatives that have wide-ranging consequences.
Reductionist perspectives on how politics works always end up at this "one side is dominating the other" kind of narrative but it's never actually that way, both sides still have a lot of influence on the various specifics of the outcome.
Are you seriously attributing public sector bureaucratic dysfunction to some sort of subversive public sector conservative operatives, or vague regulatory poison pills that you cannot actually point to here?
It seems a lot more intuitive to believe that you cannot just legislate that all government employees act selflessly towards the Greater Good, and the Homeless Industrial complex is a real thing that is not necessarily working in the interests of the public. Observing waste, fraud, and abuse and reflexively saying "this must be the fault of conservatives somehow" is just sorta sad.
yanderekko commented on OpenAI board in discussions with Sam Altman to return as CEO theverge.com/2023/11/18/2... · Posted by u/medler
If "AI ethics" means being run by so-called rationalists and Effective Altruists then it has nothing to do with ethics or doing anything for the benefit of all humanity.
It would be great to see a truly open and truly human benefit focused AI effort, but OpenAI isn't, and as far as I can tell has no chance of becoming, that. Might as well at least try to be an effective company at this point.
>If "AI ethics" means being run by so-called rationalists and Effective Altruists then it has nothing to do with ethics or doing anything for the benefit of all humanity.
Many would disagree.
If you want a for-profit AI enterprise whose conception of ethics is dumping resources into an endless game of whack-a-mole to ensure that your product cannot be used in any embarrassing way by racists on 4chan, then the market is already going to provide you with several options.
I'm not sure if you're intentionally trying to miss the point - the scam is that people who knew that demand for the asset was about to crater - because they were about to crater it, by shutting it down, extracted their investment knowing that others would not be able to.
The reddit moderators who cashed out were not the ones who were shutting down the service. They simply had insider information that allowed them to move first with this information. This was not a rugpull scenario.
Kiwifarms never gets this level of outrage going, and I’d argue it’s an order of magnitude more toxic to society than Tea would be