I kid at the Catholics' expense, but only because I think they deserve it.

It's a strange worldview where you take a complex, nuanced issue and can only view a binary good/bad. Do corporations have an important function in modern society? Absolutely. Does that make them beyond reproach?

Corporations are legal entities. What they can and cannot do—both the good and the bad—are the result of our laws. If corporations do good and bad things, we should not ignore the bad simply because they do good. The laws ought to change to minimize the bad while maximizing the good. I think you would be hard pressed to make the argument that the laws in most countries do a good job of that.

Context is important, though. We actually don't know much about pagan rituals because many pagans (like Celts, Germans, and Scandinavians) didn't have extensive writing systems. Most of what we know about Celtic rituals are assumptions based on archeological evidence or descriptions written by Romans. Other pagans ('pagan' being a very broad term), had information about their ritual practices destroyed by practitioners of Abrahamic religions. There's a reason that not many Jews, Christians, or Muslims know about the pagan origins of their own religions.

  So where does ChatGPT get this information? Fiction. Weirdos with strange blogs. Maybe some speculation by anthropologists. But ChatGPT doesn't know anything, so it has no idea that it's reciting some strange ritual it got from a WordPress blog where Steve from Arizona posts his horror short stories. That's just the most relevant material it can use to make predictive text based on your input.

While there is a ton of "dangerous" material on the internet, it doesn't take a very discerning reader to understand the context of that material. When an LLM outputs fancy-sounding text that confidently tells you bad information, in the context of a service provided by a (supposedly) reputable company, now the information becomes truly dangerous. Because context matters.

Imagine being downvoted for posting, "Catholicism is a misogynistic cult!"

Instead, I should have used mod points to +1 the AC who called out Catholicism as an international pedophile ring.

Catholic values? So you believe women should be excluded from positions of power?

When you made this post, you forgot the most important Catholic value: shame.

I've seen ads for dating apps for blacks, dating apps for latinos, dating apps for 'country folk' (i.e. white people), dating apps for gay people, etc.

So these things do exist and they don't seem to cause a brouhaha.

Where you would run into trouble is if you provided a general service and then applied restrictions. A straight-only hardware store would get you in trouble, a straight-only private club would not (after all, Baptists do exist!). I'm sure, legally, there is more nuance and all sorts of weird gray areas one could imagine, but this case seems pretty straightforward.

I don't think it's surprising that they can do that, but I still understand why a director would be upset. At the very least, I would say that such a substantial change is a violation of trust between the director and the production company. It's not like they just up-scaled the movie or added some scenes that were cut. When the director made the film, he probably didn't even consider this a possibility.

It's just another sad reminder that in the modern age the individual is nothing. The corporation is everything.

This is entirely untrue. MBAs also have to learn how to drink and golf at the same time.

In your previous comments you argued how clear and easy it is to understand and disable Recall. Here you appear to be making a contradictory argument, but in both cases you defend Recall. Why?

You should start by finding a better hosting company.

While I appreciate the benefits of DVD that you highlight, I couldn't in good conscience recommend it as a solution. There's just too much unnecessary waste to deliver media/software via physical media. The DVD itself plus the packaging and then additional pollution from distribution (and driving to the store to buy it).

One thing that could help with many of your complaints is to drastically shorten copyrights.

We count gaming PCs but most gamers don't really use their PCs as a desktop beyond "some movies [porn] and lite web browsing."

In all seriousness, though, I think it does help Linux desktop adoption because it normalizes Linux for these users. It's very common on ./ to see posts where people say, "I only use Windows for games." Gamers tend to build their own PCs (or buy weird custom rigs), so unlike most computer users the OS isn't just baked into the cost. Also, judging by their hardware, ricing Linux should be right up their alley.

Steam legitimizes Linux gaming and you get extra nerd cred for doing it. That's not to say the "year of the Linux desktop" is upon up, but the market is won one niche at a time. Personally, I don't care if Linux comes to dominate the desktop like it does the server world. I just want it to gain enough market share so the big developers have to support it and I don't have to use macOS for certain things at work at Linux for everything else.

You linked to a post you made that has nothing to do with the UI. Your gripes are oddly specific and probably only apply to you. But your original post blasts LibreOffice for having a "terrible interface."

It's kind of a dick move to discourage people from using FOSS that provides a viable alternative to the proprietary nightmare that is MS Office because it lacks a KEYBOARD SHORTCUT you like and you have some weird complaint about its autocorrect (I won't pretend to understand that one, as I find autocorrect on any program to be an annoyance that I immediately turn off). If those are the things that keep you on MS Office, fine. But from UI best practices LibreOffice is the clear winner, and that was your original criticism. For most functions, it takes less clicks and less searching on LibreOffice than MS Office (also, LibreOffice provides the option to switch to that terrible ribbon interface to make the MS Office users feel comfortable).

What do you consider a good interface? The stupid ribbon thing where you have to futz around with tabs to find the oversided icon (that may have a dropdown) to the thing you need, that may or may not switch you to a completely different window?

The LibreOffice UI is much more efficient and intuitive for users. It looks better, too.

That's true. I certainly wouldn't say my post should be translated directly into legislation, but I think the basic idea is solid. We need to do something to eliminate the quick trading, increase shareholder liability to discourage risky behavior, and try to eliminate weird games where stocks are just used as casino chips.

If there was a way to enforce it I would also like to see the elimination of any automated buying/selling.