The underlying problem, according to Boston College economist and sociologist Juliet Schor, is that businesses tend to simply reallocate the time AI saves.
Yeah, no shit. The benefits of improved productivity haven't been felt by workers for over four decades at this point.
Game awards should just evaluate the quality of the game not make political statements.
Sounds like you should make your own game awards. It is, in fact, the prerogative of the award organizer to decide their selection criteria.
You mean because it learns just like people do from our common cultural heritage?
No, because it flagrantly violates copyright in a way that normal humans are not allowed to do.
Remember, the point of intellectual property is to incentivize creation not to allow authors to block the creation of new works.
Why can't I publish Star Wars fanfiction, while OpenAi can? Why are we automating the fun parts of life, like artistic creation, while humans are stuck doing the miserable, tedious labour? Copyright is meant to incentivize creation by people because only the creative output of people has value.
I'd point out that the problem is that folks who advocate for these good-sounding (no hungry, no homeless, no discrimination) policies and the Communist/Socialist methods of achieving them aren't too up front with the actual methods they want to use to get there. They want to steal. I'm not talking about theft (that's done by stealth). I'm talking about robbery (theft by the threat of force).
Is this the libertarian "taxes are theft" meme? I've never known progressives to be unwilling to acknowledge the fact that public services and infrastructure are funded by taxes. Even the ones libertarians like, like the military, police, and judicial system require funding, and taxes are the best way to do that.
They'd rather sloganize with things like "Don't speak when a black women is speaking."
I've never seen someone on the left put this forward as any sort of policy proposal, so I'm not going to talk about it further.
Then they appear to really want to take that to the next level by trashing 1A with "hate speech" laws.
All societies place limits on people's freedom for the sake of public safety; it's the old "your right to swing your fist ends at my nose" thing. In a democracy, there are bound to be discussions on where exactly the balance between safety and freedom lies, and the contention from progressives is that the harm of hate speech outweighs the value of allowing it. Nowhere on Earth is freedom fully prioritized over safety; even in the US, it's illegal to post an open bounty on someone's life, for example.
And not to devolve into whatboutism, but with Trump recently trying to criminalize flag burning, it's not like Republicans are better than Democrats on this issue.
COVID made all those intentions quite clear and put them all in the open, including that shocking numbers [rasmussenreports.com] of lefties wanted concentration camps for CV19 policy refuseniks.
It seems like Rasmussen Reports is not particularly credible so I'm not going to go into this too deeply, but your link mostly talks about Biden supporters. If your claim is that Joe Biden is far left, then you have a fundamental misunderstanding of progressive politics.
Where are those that [...] truly believe that all are God's children and we should all treat each other as fellow human beings, brothers and sisters? I don't see it much in the woke far left [...]
Isn't this exactly the reason why the far left are objecting to the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza? Isn't this exactly why the far left are so vocal in their support for trans rights? Isn't this why the far left believes health care should be universal? Isn't this why the far left wants to use social workers instead of police for things like wellness checks?
Obviously, I can't speak for everyone who considers themselves on the left, and every group has its share of vocal idiots, but it seems to me that most policies that the left advocates for are motivated by wanting to treat all humans equally and fairly and well.
If you have control over the patterns they are trained on, you can control what they reproduce.
Yeah, but no one really does have control over the patterns they are trained on. All the publicly available models are trained by scraping vast swathes of the public internet. There's no practical way for AI companies to vet the data and avoid this kind of poisoning, which means they are selling a product that they can't control, and which can't be relied on to deliver what they promise.
At this point, I genuinely question which of China abusing Americans' private data or the American monopolies in cahoots with the American fascist state doing the same thing is worse.
It's not a close comparison. The American fascist state + corporations are much more dangerous to Americans than China is.
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law. -- Roy Santoro
