Why, a hexvex of course!
Honestly, I’ve used “hey, can we keep it to friends” a lot over the years. Partners I’ve more earnestly turned down have sat there and quizzed me nonstop as to why, some have turned violent, and then there are the quiet ones that just slander you continually. Emotional blackmail is the bare minimum I’ve expected over the years.
The amount of absolutely insane women out there is beyond frightening.
Good to know, I’ll go ask one if the profs in our school of built environment for more info. See if they can offer more insight there.
Willkommen in der Kolonie
(My German is awful, but it had to be done)
Definitely a good point to raise; thanks for doing so!
Here’s a fun one - where do you stand on those forced to commute dur to housing prices near inner city work (e.g. I live in near poverty paying a mortgage for a small place near where I work due to poor public transport so I can walk to work - how does this figure into the anti-car vision? Is it an employer issue, a government issue, a personal sacrifice, or something else entirely?)
I dunno, the use of AI Ethicist fits as they’re not against the concept of generative AI as a whole, they’re against unethical generative AI (in terms of stolen training data and environmental harm).
If the world transitioned to a post-IP (intellectual property) society (as we need to), with AI eating less power, then AI Ethicists are unlikely to object.
Would you happen to be a vegan who is also anti-car by any chance?
If so, I can recommend fuckcars on ml as they share your viewpoint.
I applaud folks like this - they make a choice and stick with it. No “I’ll never use AI to generate art but I vibe code to save time” hypocrisy. No “I use it to help me with maths, but I’d never use it to steal artistic work”.
Just straight up “it is an environmental hazard, it is unethical, not engaging”. Should be called “AI Ethicists” rather than “AI Vegans”.
Pretty much - we all put our names to them, but they do nothing.
The best option is to organise writing campaigns to your local MP and indicate that this is the decider on your vote.
*so that the government can say kids won’t watch porn.
Rule 1 of computers that everyone who has taught an ICT class learns - if little Timmy wants titties, he finds a way.
I thought it was the gays, oh wait no its the transes, hang on we’re back to the 1500s and are just saying “it’s smut”. It’s very “violent video games turn men into violent monsters”.
Want to really know what’s radicalising young men: a mixed hangover of “the provider role” clinging on, two decades of economic implosion, and normalised sexism aimed at addressing systemic injustices. That’s how you end up with radicalised young men.
If I can buy a game on Gog I do - their lack of DRM, Linux ports, and prices just make me happy.
Every year I tell timetabling “don’t inflict 9am classes on my students, it provably punishes poorer students (commute costs) and drives poor engagement”, every year they ignore me.
Many of your teachers hated morning classes too.
That sounds a bit like fear mongering from Reform: a VPN is safety 101 when using public networks, and most businesses make use of VPNs to secure their data. They are also a key component if WFH (you use the company VPN).
If Labour are stupid enough to go after VPN usage, I suspect it would guarantee their loss at the next election.
Trouble is, there is little that can be done.
Enough folks drank the coolaid, and now we’re stuck with surveillance laws masquerading as child protection laws.
Those laws can, and will, get worse over time. However, new mediums will arise, or old ones will rise to the occasion (IRC goes brr). The main thing to do is remain calm, make it a key voter issue, and watch the bastards fold right before the next election.
See, there are a few ways this could go.
Age verification is as secure and private as promised, and it’s left at that. I like to call this “the miracle”, and we all know those don’t happen.
Age verification is as secure and private as promised, but a government asks for “access to data to prevent crime” - things degenerate from there. This is the “systemic failure” scenario.
Age verification is as secure and private as promised, but new scams evolve around it to make it dangerous. This would be the “criminal element” scenario.
Age verification is not as secure and private as promised, and a leak occurs destroying lives and careers. This is the “system failure” scenario.
Age verification is as secure and private as promised, but a few companies start scraping and selling data, leading to widespread harms. This is the “unethical merchant” scenario, and the most likely outcome.
All in all, there is only one “ok” scenario, and a lot of horrific ones. The math says we’re entirely boned ^_^
Well we all saw that coming.
The parental and elderly voting bloc is very hard to ignore, and those groups tend to be less privacy conscious (as well as pro-anything “protect the children”).
The only way it’s getting repealed is if enough labour voters raise a fuss. Given Reform’s messaging (i.e. repeal it) and how worried Labour are over Reform’s polling, that is likely the only lever that’ll work. However, that’s a long game - one that will take years to play out.
Yeah, should be an option to pay the fine online. No court summons needed (waste of taxpayer money).
Its one of those niche communities that makes me smile - a lot of creativity there. They’re my kind of critters (absolute geeks and nerds).
I’ve not read blindsight, now I feel I need to!
Thanks for the quote ^_^
Oh no, someone might not be paying them for their user generated content (!)
To be fair, it’s probably best that history forgets this period of the web…