TheFriar

joined 1 year ago
[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I’d argue the opposite. Capitalism doesn’t enrich society. It enriches capitalism. Any “benefit” to society is purely for selfish reasons. Its motives being corrupt, its actions are not noble.

[there being no safety nets] is a government problem, not a company’s

Capitalism ruined this too. Lobbyists, special interest “donations” (read: bribes), are all done by companies just like this one. They’ll lobby for harmful laws, under the guise of “but driverless cars are for the people’s safety!” All the while, evading taxes and lobbying against closing those tax loopholes or raising taxes to help the workers who now have no job.

These things don’t exist in a vacuum. Especially in today’s late stage of capitalism, there is no moral behavior from these companies, because they are wading into a world where their very existence offers them and seemingly implores them to do harm for their bottom line. There is no “church and state” separation between capital and governance. They are a rat king, further entangled by every new company making their way into this utterly corrupt marketplace of crookery and exploitation. We can’t ignore what’s happened over and over and over and over again because this time the benefit will surely outweigh the harm done to achieve profitability!

[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Well, fuck a company’s property. What have they ever done for me? Or for anyone but themselves for that matter? They’d happily see us all starve if it meant line go up. Fuck em, down with the line.

[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Shit, man. I spent so much time with my closest friends, they were closer than my family. Different strokes for different folks.

[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 12 points 9 months ago (4 children)

lol I’m mostly in agreement, but I can’t imagine adolescence without that burning need to go out and see what happens. I mean, (Jesus, this makes me feel old), throughout most of high school, we had cell phones, but not smart phones. Smartphones were invented the year I graduated high school.

But, the concept of going out just to be out of the house was so strong in me if I had to stay home one night I felt like the world was ending. “What’s happening out there,” “I bet [so and so] is doing something fun.” “I have to get out of this house.” And then as soon as I left the house, very excited, it was something of a relief to find out none of my friends were doing anything fun, but I’d drag them out of the house and we’d go sit in a parking lot somewhere, spending $2 for a drink and a fries, still being hungry, but not having any more money, finding a friend with weed, or finding a more secluded place to hang out, stand around for hours cracking jokes and listening to music…dude, those were the times. Although, don’t get me wrong, I wasn’t cool or popular. I had my core friends, a true group of losers. But fuck if we weren’t trying to live a more sociable or interesting life despite our social awkwardness. And when we did find a party hosted by someone who’d let us come? We were so excited…and then we ended up hanging out together doing the same shit we were doing in the parking lot. But this time with some girls around.

I can’t imagine an adolescence filled with the desire to stay home.

[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 11 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Hey, I’m all for upending the status quo. But that “thankless job” is one people rely on. My dad included. This isn’t some noble act by a company to end meaningless, menial work. It’s a ploy by a company to cut those pesky “workers” out of the money. There’s no backup plan for the people who rely on driving for money—more people than ever, by the way. This is literally a profit boosting “evolution” in the continued unlivability crisis. This isn’t Star Trek. It’s seasons 3-4 of Mr. Robot.

[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 26 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Not people. Companies.

Fuck ‘em. This is funny.

[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Well, I am curious to hear at least a little about your different beliefs.

I mean, this is something I was thinking about earlier this week. In general, incrementalism and capitalism and neoliberalism are all harmful. Participating in them or advocating for their expansion while knowing overall that theyre harmful concepts seems to go against my beliefs. But as I see it, we are stuck in this system. I think a big thing a lot of leftists get wrong is arguing all or nothing. “I refuse to participate because I don’t believe in this system. I only advocate for the complete destruction of this system.” It’s very, very common.

Meanwhile, more harmful laws get passed because everyone who wants better sat out. Now, that mostly applies to voting, even on direct ballot measures. So it seems counterintuitive for me, as someone who doesn’t believe in the state, to advocate for regulations—a more robust state with more oversight powers. But expanded oversight is a bitter pill. It is necessary as long as this system exists. Advocating for less, again, in my position, would seem like my path forward. But I’d argue that incrementalism is less harmful than capitalism. And if the former can put a dent in the latter to safeguard against expanded harm, then I’m for it. Even though my “-ism” would supposedly preclude me from saying so.

I think regulating AI companies is necessary. I think watermarks are a pretty small price to pay for the basic concept of objective truth/proof of it. We are barreling toward a time where photographic evidence and audio evidence are suddenly all up for debate. Avoiding that future trumps any sort of concern I have for the industry. It’s a small step in the right direction, and I don’t have the solution or anything, but I think measures like this should be put into place.

[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Hey said “I hope lawmakers don’t do too much damage.” That’s what I was focusing on. How could lawmakers do damage to it? By attempting to regulate it. Hence my question.

[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 8 points 9 months ago

“I don’t know why everyone is overreacting. People just need to be way smarter and be more level headed. Problem solved.”

[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago (8 children)

Are you saying regulations would be harmful?

[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 19 points 9 months ago

…because capitalism.

[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Exactly. Not to mention, why the fuck is it a surprise that a computer twisting the knobs “at superhuman speed” would be better at this game than humans. Like, no shit. We can’t compute how the degrees at which we’re turning the knobs affects the speed of the ball, can’t store that information for next time, and find the best way not making the same mistakes twice. Because…we’re human. We don’t have that finely tuned ability…because we’re not machines.

So…this isn’t “AI” despite the robot hands they put in the thumbnail and no shit a dedicated computer could master this game. I’m surprised it took six hours.

view more: ‹ prev next ›