Well it’s now illegal to make cars that don’t spy
on you
18,721 karma · joined November 3, 2017
If people really cared, they’d chose reputable suppliers that sell non toxic food. If they are eating food with lead, they don’t care.
Don’t force your wordview on people through regulation
It’s the only weapon that’s going to hit them along with the foot soldiers
China is actually the adult in the room.
Since 1979, 45 years ago, China has not dropped a single bomb on foreign land. That’s two generations peace.
In that timeframe, USA has attacked 37 countries, France 22, Britain 10, and Italy has attacked 6.
What determines if a country is a threat? Simple test - would they arrest Eipstein and execute him?
More politically correct phrasing - “do they respect American economic elites.” ?
If the answer is no, the country is ‘a threat to the west’
You don’t believe me? Name 2 countries that don’t fit this model.
This does not even have meaning in English.
Policy of US government is not policy of US? When Trump decided to bomb Iran it was just a suggestion?
I don’t think dozens of large independent companies and thousands of researchers are working just to spite Sam Altman. Ad much as I don’t like him, I have other things to do and I am sure so do they.
It’s not even been five years of AI, and we’ve already arrived at the point where the human is wrong and the AI is right.
Mind you this is in an area where the benchmark is the opinion of the human ! So if the customer is saying you’ve shown enough empathy but AI says you haven’t, then you take opinion of the AI?
Soon we’re going to have a situation where the patient is breathing, but the AI says he’s dead.
The second is likely easier than the first
Apparently, everyone is building the platform all the time, even when it’s just a user facing application
He was arrested, jailed, tried and convicted. He was not imprisoned, which I did not say he was. The only thing I misremembered is the age.
The actual criminals that caused death of a hundred people have not been charged with any crime.
Amazing how pointing out obvious corruption is unpopular here. Or do people honestly believe that making video about a crime should be punished more than the crime itself?
Are we taking about abolishing the fiat currency system or bringing back the guillotines ?
Is it? What’s the most effective boycott you can think of ever achieved?
Nah, it’s corruption the CEO of the company that forged fire safety documents was given legal immunity.
The amount of administrative tasks, bureaucracy and complexity an adult, let alone a parent, has to navigate on a daily basis has increased 100x since the 70’s. It is very convent for corporations but less convenient for parents. Just look at the amount of legal contract you have to sign relating to data, Eula, etc.
> Parents, legally, are required to provide a safe and growing environment.
True, but be carefull, people might solve the problem in ways you don’t expect.
For example if someone races near a kids playground on electric skateboard at 50 km/h, and authorities keep ignoring the issue, they might just hit an unexpected obstacle
Are you sure about that? So far the negatives vastly outweigh the positives. Imagine a statement:
> as a concept there isn’t an issue with a social credit score / great firewall / reeducation camp as long as they are done by a competent well-meaning person
But we gave legal immunity to the corporate executives that forged fire testing certificates and caused the actual fire that killed over 100 people
And when I say we have Russia-style corruption no one believes me
Because British government has just made leaseholders of apartments liable for costs of fixing forged and fraudulently obtained fire safety certification of apartment blocks.
The manufacturers of cladding materials have forged the fire safety certificate, the construction company has not followed the law when it comes to fire breaks and other fire safety system, the government building control has examined the building and signed it off as correct, possibly corruptly.
But after a skyscraper burned down with all the residents inside, now the residents are liable.
Back in the Russian empire a person could buy themselves out of serfdom if they could come up with the money… which was difficult for obvious reasons.
And this feels like a modern reincarnation of the system.
It’s categorised as ‘ Unfree Labour’
It’s worse than that, most consumers don’t even know what good looks like any more. We are much more restricted and maybe lower variety of experience.
You could serve half the consumers rat meat instead of beef and they wouldn’t know the difference.
> The changes we see in style can be attributed to changes in politics and civilization. Who we are and what we think of ourselves.
There is something to this even if the way this is expressed is clumsy
That would be nice but that is not the current situation, neither my stolen bicycle nor the fraud that caused 2008 had resulted in any arrests. Until such time that all crimes are crimes, it is a valid question.
> by the numbers the wealthy and corporations pay significantly more in taxes than the “people who own nothing”
This statement is highly misleading in three different dimensions:
Firstly, both in UK and in USA individuals pay like 5x more in income tax than corporations pay in tax. So people pay more tax and yet prosecutions against corporations are less than 1% of all prosecutions, that seems questionable.
Secondly, what is the statistics you are citing is actually saying? "Out of the people that declare income to government, those that declare the most income, pay the most tax". That's a bit self-evident, isn't it?
It does not address the claim that wealthiest people don't declare taxable income, and therefore pay little tax.
Thirdly, the measurement needs to be relative, not absolute. The claim "I pay less income tax than Facebook does' is true, but Facebook pays the effective tax rate of about 3%.
If the property owner doesn’t make bare minimum effort to protect the property
Then how much effort and money should taxpayer spend to protect and prosecute regarding the same property?
It seems strange to imply that people that own nothing must through their taxes pay for protection of property of the people who do own everything.
Huh? Do FBI/CIA/etc run that way?
I disagree, producing something valuable is common, and it’s common for scientists / inventors / artists / composers to die poor.
Selling, Capturing the value, and building businesses on top is hard.