> Meta doesn't really know how to do anything else with any skill.
They don't know how to do Facebook very well either: it's been pretty much stagnant and enshittified to death for the past 22 years, and it feels like a forum for greying people whose greying friends haven't bothered to move on either, or to get the date of the next annual meeting of the bridge club.
one of those companies whose sole purpose seems to be annoying you by slapping their name as a watermark on a generic image you'd like to use in a meme, and force to spend 10 seconds finding somewhere else because you were never going to pay a stupid company to remove their mark on a bad picture you can find everywhere.
I wonder how those companies still exist, let alone make any money.
Anyway, the modern way to use copyrighted photos for free is to ask stable diffusion to regenerate it, because the AI companies have done all the data stealing for you and repackaged the stolen data into "models" you can use for free.
I'm personally convinced they're a cutout. They're being used to intentionally push this fear agenda so that the government can crack down and further implement the panopticon.
It's the only reasonable response to them repeatedly saying, "our products are dangerous". They're pushing for government intervention, and for whatever reason, want industry regulation or governmental industry control.
On one hand you've got potential nationstate-threatening technology which could take out power plants and penetrate sensitive top secret systems.
On the other hand you've got mean words and fake nudie pics.
I think your priorities are a bit fucked and navel gazing.
Exactly.
You expect me to believe the thing that provided some income disparity relief for a large percentage of remote workers (same pay, lower costs from relocating) is at fault for others not having jobs? I've worked (remotely) with young people. They seem eager and capable, far more so than most other age demographics.
This is just companies finding excuses, looking to claw back more control.
It sounds like you don't understand how the court system works. The SCOTUS only hears cases which are brought before it, and then selectively.
Which cases specifically do you feel indicate corruption on the part of the SCOTUS? There are definitely some dissenting decisions which don't adhere to the US constitution, and there is definitely a long running theme in the courts of activist judges re-interpreting well defined language, and perhaps (probably) even a couple judges who are compromised, but I'm not aware of any evidence of corruption.
Not much. Plutonium isn't like uranium, it's effectively safe for human contact outside its fissioned form. This has been pretty well documented.
This is a step forward which is a long time overdue. It should've happened 30 years ago, and we'd have averted having to depend on China for our electricity production (wind + solar) without the net-zero production problems those two 'sources' introduce.
A method of solution is perfect if we can forsee from the start, and even prove, that following that method we shall attain our aim. -- Leibnitz
