Honestly, I’m a fan of abolishing IP law too, but for some reason I suspect the implementation of that they support is very different than the one I support

And it’s beyond obvious in the way LLMs are conditioned, especially if you’re used them long enough to notice trends. Where early on their responses were straight to the point (inaccurate as hell, yes, but that’s not what we’re talking about in this case) today instead they are meandering and full of straight engagement bait - programmed to feign some level of curiosity and ask stupid and needless follow-up questions to “keep the conversation going.” I suspect this is just a way to increase token usage to further exploit and drain the whales who tend to pay for these kinds of services, personally.

There is no shortage of ethical quandaries brought into the world with the rise of LLMs, but in my opinion the locked-down nature of these systems is one of the most problematic; if LLMs are going to be the commonality it seems the tech sector is insistent on making happen, then we really need to push back on these companies being able to control and guide them in their own monetary interests.

deleted by creator

I wish Vivaldi wasn’t Chromium-based, because I think it’s the slickest browser out there.

But it’s chromium, so it’s time to move on to Firefox regardless.

Ladybird development can’t happen fast enough.

Fr seeing in the modlog that people are regularly getting banned from parts of the fediverse for innocuous shit like “chronic downvoting” is so disappointing.

Imo however you do or do not hit the little arrow buttons should never have any bearing on your account or standing, at all.

I don’t even understand why mods/admins have access to see how people are voting, fuck that bullshit.

I have a Pixel. It is literally made by one of the largest advertising companies in the world.

Bigger screens mean bigger and more obtrusive ads.

I’m convinced this is 90% of the reason right here.

Why is there steak at the steakhouse??

I’m fine with earning some kind of influence based on community participation that could be then used for things like rewards, since that tied to genuine community good standing…

But even then I’m also very fine with not having any of that, so I guess then what’s the point?

That’s exactly what the US government did under Teddy Roosevelt when it forced by law these large entities to divest and break up into smaller ones not subsidiarized to each other. And yes, they should also do this to Amazon and Microsoft.

edit: I guess I should say I understand they can’t force them to break up in this instance, but they can simply state they won’t do business with the entities at present and recommend it. If that doesn’t happen, I am confident other savvy investors will be happy to fill any hole left by these giants. The world will keep turning, I promise.

My friend, you yourself have been implying this whole time that Google’s infrastructure is too vital and important to remove - how do you not see that this means they are too powerful? Remember trust-busting? Remember anti-monopoly activism? Nobody thought that by breaking up the railroads people wouldn’t need trains anymore, but they understood the danger of allowing a single company to have such market dominance and what it that would mean for consumers. Same thing here. And yes, I’m aware this requires continual diligence as the phone companies that were once PacBell are now bigger than it was, but that lacking of failure to continue enforcing anti-trust doesn’t mean the concept is wrong.

No single company should be allowed to have such influence that very idea of them going away leads to the very doomsday considerations we’ve been talking about. That’s what this is all about.

Step one in saving us from the oncoming corporate technocracy?

None that insane hyperbole doomsday scenario would happen. None of it.

I think people and societies are vastly more resilient that you’re implying, and would survive an admittedly complex 6 month period to switch necessary services. Would it be hard? Yeah absolutely. But I’ve never accepted “but it’s so hard!!” as valid reason to hold off positive progress.

What “normal solutions” are actually in progress with any real potential of happening? Be for fucking real.

Meanwhile what insane doomsday scenario do you think would happen if Google services were banned and people had the given period to find alternatives?

You’re talking about a fantasy solution that doesn’t exist then blowing the consequences of this possible action wildly out of proportion in gross hyperbole.

Yes you’re right, blocking a single corporation is totally similar to dropping a nuclear weapon on a civilian site, you’ve shown me the error of my ways.

Holy fucking hyperbole, Batman!

Taking a stance against corporate overreach feels extremely necessary to me.

Worthwhile chaos. It’s exactly that fear of consequences that enables their power

Remember folks, Reddit invented levity. Before Reddit “sarcasm” was just a Tuscan pasta dish.

But it also doesn’t have the incentive to allow them either. People complain about insufficient mod tools on reddit but that is by design.

Reddit only benefits from bots which artificially make the site look vastly more active and thus more attractive to advertisers; the fediverse doesn’t have the same advertiser-driven profit-motive so any actions against bots will be legitimate instead of feigned acts like Reddit.

Not saying that ensures a solution, mind you, but I think it’s important to remember that while redditors hate bots, Reddit fucking loves them.