Oh, so you're just a typical internet tough guy who makes assumptions about everything and everyone due to lack of actual real world experience. Get a life.

You "noticed" that? I found it to be not well supported at all so it wasn't a consideration. How do you know what you're asserting here? It wasn't in evidence in what was presented for this discussion.

If you want to make an argument at least pick the idiot reporter that started following someone in their car. Because that is something we have first hand evidence for in this story.

Whether you do or don't, it's pretty obvious you support this because your "argument" boils down to semantics and obviously false separation of government and private companies (as if the government can't stop them, but then buys data from them). You're not worth spending any more time on as it's clear you've made your mind up.

Guess who else used to be a democrat?

Also from the article context it's pretty clear the flock employees are being trained to make false reports with specific phrases "might be armed" and "harassing" when neither are true. Just read what was said about people going around the preimeter of their property. It's laughably false with just the right amojnt of weasel words and possibility of interpertation to not be an obviously false report. I'm so tired of that style of weasel language. It's painfully obvious what's going on and one has to be lobotomized or a bootlicker to support it.

"Privacy in a public place" is not what's being asked for. The concept of "not having privacy in public" is completely and totally outdated and different now that you can be passivley tracked by a network of cameras and software in a way that used to take a warrant and significant amount of law enforcement officers. This now happens all the time, without any action on the part of law enforment or flock, just by the nature of the system. Again, without a warrant Without even resonable suspicion or probably cause. To be called up on demand for any reason and without a warrant. Do you understand the difference?

"The left". You're tagging yourself as a media siloed, identity politics bring poisoned tool who's opinion doesn't matter in large part because it's not a persona opinion, it's what you've been told to repeat to stay in your preferred in-group. How pathetic.

It doesn't seem like the majority. The elon stans are really loud. I wonder what has to happen to you to be a slavishly dedicated beta to someone like that.

A plastic recycling process that is to expensive to be practical? How novel, it's almost like every plastic recycling process is too expensive to use, has been since the beginning, and the plastic industry knew this would be the case from the start.

So you _did_ understand the post, but you disagreed with it? And decided that because you were correctly called out you have nothing left by ad homineim? Cool, you're not an embarassment to yourself at all.

Do you have a profound reading comprehension issue? I can't imagine how else you were unable to follow that post.

There was a long term vision starting with Reagan. You (and I) just don't like it because we weren't already part of the .1%.

What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Are you under the impression that everyone who uses a slop bot has a high end GPU and the ability to run it on that? Or do you think it's more likely that those models are being run "in the coud" (i.e. a datacenter) for consumption?

Is this a seriosu question? It goes back into the atmosphere rather than aquifers or rivers (i.e. the places we get water from). It goes elsewhere and comes down as rain in places where there is already plenty of water.

Data center water usage isn't a universal problem. It's a location specific issue.

Even if they ran on solar, the resources and energy required to manufacture the data center, contents, and power components is not a reasonable trade off when it's sole purpose is "AI" or "big data" (i.e. consumer surveilance).