you’re right, there’s probably some anti-ai/anti-scraping folks on there aswell as here. Personally I most definitely hate intellectual property more than I do generative AI. But you’re right, different people on there will feel differently. But the point still stands that for those who thought they shared their thoughts with the world, their ideas that they donated were taken from them.
This isn’t news.
People who posted on Reddit ( speaking in the past tense, because who would continue to do so now that we have better things? ) never intended for it to be of limited access. Reddit was a publicly accessible place, and people shared their thoughts and comments on it because it was the frontpage of the internet, so the place of choice to share things with the world. That being scraped should not be a problem. But clearly Reddit didn’t want to give you a platform to share your thoughts with the world, they wanted you to donate your thoughts and take it as their property so that they can capitalize on it.
And Jesus said: “Don’t share thy bread nor thy fish, for it is socialism, and it is wrong.”
If the EU doesn’t combine forces to get out of this tech-dependency, than what do we have the EU for? I am a big fan the EU, it’s doing many things for us already, but I’m really hoping we can work our way out of this together, and I hope we choose the FOSS-route so that we significantly help the world forward
Those are some interesting apps of choice. Good thing people share these, in case people don’t know about them yet.
Jesus popped up at South Park elementary too.
It suggests that nobody talks in the past tense about people have that just died. Which is false, because we do.
The question is if it’s edge cases. People suffer sexual trauma in very large numbers and working in psychiatry has taught me how incredibly harmful it can be. If this kind of material could help prevent sexual trauma, we should definitely allow it. If research shows that it makes problems far worse, we should consider limiting access to it. I am not saying either is the case, I am saying I don’t understand what is wrong with the question itself.
The idea that what you see online has an effect on what you do offline, is not that far fetched is it? I mean, I don’t know if it’s true and I guess you could argue it could work in both directions too. Do people blow off steam online so they don’t have to enact their darkest fantasties IRL. Or does the online material encourage or normalize these things? It could also be so that this works different for different people. It let’s one person blow of steam, while it pushes someone else over the edge to do something horrendous. And if that is the case, is it fair to take it away from those who are not negatively influenced by it, to prevent those in whom it inspires bad actions from seeing it. I guess we’d need research on the matter, I don’t know if it exist or how reliable it is. But I don’t think it’s a nonsensical question to ask what the effects are.
I get the feeling this is somehow also criticizing this particular woman. Someone did a small good thing, while others do bad things on a very large scale. What a naive idiot! Not a very helpful sentiment. One needs to look up for moral guidance, not down.
If humanity needs insight into anything, surely it is business. Doing market research is doing the Lords work. If only we could structure society in such a way that automatically most of the available money would be directed to market research and marketing, the world would be a better place.
I suppose my sarcasm here is obvious. But it’s not uncommon to hear people on the right say things like ‘but the money needs to be earned first, before it’s spent, therefor we shouldn’t hinder business in any way.’. As if to say 'we just need to make more room for business people to do their thing, and then we’ll be good. It amazes me how people fail to see how ‘business’ as we know it is such ill-directed human effort. I know, we need to be productive, we need to do good things, I am all in favor of that, but doing whatever makes the most money for a company, isn’t the equivalent of what is good.