Assuming we’re talking about instances we’d recommend to new Fediverse users, I’d recommend against lemmy.world. Not because there’s anything wrong with the instance, but simply because it’s the largest, by a fairly large margin. A central principal of the fediverse is decentralization, and to that end, it’s healthier to spread the users across many instances than to have folks concentrated too heavily on any one.

I rarely feel as stupid as when reading anything about quantum computing. The whole field could just be a giant in-joke where none of it exists and they’re all just spouting nonsense technical jargon to confound the plebs, and I’d be oblivious.

Boy, those racists sure were right. Clearly nobody wants to see Bad Bunny at the half-time show.

[To preempt the obvious objection, I’m talking about e.g. a private residence, not a business.]

No, clearly not, as I already addressed. Fuck off.

Is this about the wedge cut out of the top, or was there something before that that I should feel upset about?

makes a big deal of telling new hires that they can be let go for any reason with no notice because if this

Purely out of curiosity, does he still expect people to give 2 weeks notice (or any notice) when they quit?

I would argue that in private spaces, absolutely. The owner of a private space has the exclusive right to admit anyone they choose and bar anyone they choose, based on any criteria they wish. [To preempt the obvious objection, I’m talking about e.g. a private residence, not a business.]

I’d argue this is doubly true for support group style groups. If there’s a support group for a topic that is exclusively experienced by one sex, I don’t think it’s at all unreasonable to make that group exclusively for that sex. (Examples might be testicular or ovarian cancer sufferers.)

The word ‘terrorist’ has lost all meaning at this point.

I would even go a step further and say that cops’ testimony should not even be accepted if they don’t have bodycam footage to back it up. When you have a camera that’s able to verify anything you need it to, the absence of that verification should be viewed through the lens that you specifically did not want whatever was happening during that time to be recorded.

I disagree; “fake it til you make it” prescribes specific behavior (faking it) for a specific period of time (until you make it) but does not specify what behavior should take place (faking it or not) after that period has been exceeded.

If AI agents stick around, I feel like they’re going to be the thing millennials as a generation refuse to adopt and are made fun of for in 20-30 years. Younger generations will be automating their lives and millennials will be the holdouts, writing our emails manually and doing our own banking, while our grandkids are like, “Grandpa, you know AI can do all of that for you, why are you still living in the 2000s?” And we’ll tell stories about how, in our day, AI used to ruin peoples’ lives on a whim.

Not even Epstein wanted to associate with Dick Cheney.

This has always been my understanding of the purpose behind the signs. It removes or at least makes it harder to use the defense that you didn’t know you were trespassing.

How do you think your son would feel about that when you’re on your death bed, if he knew? Knowing that he could have had you around for another year or more, if only you hadn’t used this power? Do you think those fleeting moments would be worth more to him than those extra years?

How would you feel if he, in turn, decided to spend decades of his own life to extend those last few moments with you?

and privatised

Completely agree with you here. If the technology was being developed and made available to everyone for non-commercial use, while they charged for the commercial use cases, I’d have less of an issue with it (aside from the obvious and serious objection that they’re functionally stealing creatives’ work and profiting off of it - but again, I think this objection could be invalidated with UBI.)

I’m going to play devil’s advocate and present a hypothetical alternative here…

Visual art is not about portraying something in such or such specific manner (be it realism, surrealism, or whatever else) it is about sharing an experience (which no AI can do, as it doesn’t live and can’t experience shit by itself) and it is about sharing an emotion that can be ranging from the pure emotional one to the most cerebral.

AI art is boring.

I’d argue that in some applications, this is fine. For example, corporate logos, the equivalent of clip art in presentations, etc. You can argue that that isn’t really ‘art’ in the sense that you’re describing it, but whatever you want to call it, personally, I don’t care if no artist has to do that BS. I highly doubt many artists really want to be doing that stuff. The problem isn’t that AI is being used to generate soulless art for soulless projects, it’s that it’s taking work away from real artists (and that we as modern humans, as a whole, put so much weight on employment).

If we gave UBI to creatives that covered all of their expenses and let them pursue whatever projects they wanted to work on (and thereby we still, as a species, got to enjoy the actual art by actual artists), would it be so bad that the shitty work is being done by a computer? Theoretically there’d be more ‘real’ art, since artists wouldn’t have to waste their time on the bullshit. Let’s go back to a system of patronage, where society as a whole become the patrons.

Usual people reasons - staking claim to their bit of people territory, finding a mate, sounding an alarm…

Yeah, it doesn’t fit the template but the low IQ version would be more like “You only need ChatGPT for coding.”

Or Risktego - it’s a game of Risk, where each battle is determined by an individual game of Stratego.