Pretty much the definition of corrupt/biased "fact checkers" right here. It's a mechanism where the car can decide to turn itself off and prevent you from driving. It's literally a kill switch, where the car refuses your commands. They're arguing semantics about how it currently isn't a remote kill switch, only a local kill switch. Reminds me of other similarly ridiculous "fact checks" where someone claims something like "X is raising taxes by 9%!" and they fact check it as "completely false" because technically it's not 9%, it's 9.1%, or whatever.
Of course in the future the kill switch will also be mandated to be remotely triggerable, we all know it, but by that time the overton window will have shifted far enough, by things like mandating local kill switches, that making it remote as well will slip through easily in however many years.
I will never in my life own a vehicle that can decide, locally or remotely, to refuse to function, or that can decide to slam on the brakes by itself, or that can phone home data about me. Not sure how much longer I can get away with that before older, non-smart cars are declared evil and banned, in the name of climate change or walkable cities or whatever, but we'll see.
"It's not a kill switch, it slows the vehicle to a stop instead of being instant." I fail to see the practical difference. I don't want my car incorrectly deciding I am impaired and "coasting to a gentle stop" on the way to a hospital during a medical emergency or something.
Maybe kill-switch is not the best definition of the feature. The required technology monitors the driver to prevent starting the car or forcing it to pull over. In the context of the parent article which explains how the overall monitoring systems fail on privacy and security, we can see how these combined with the car stopping feature can be used against us. We are ultimately trusting the companies and government to do what is in our interests rather than theirs. Some people trust Apple not to use or share their data with government to be used against them. Trusting the largest corporation in the world and the most powerful government in the world is a major leap for me, but everybody theoretically makes their own choices.
Worldcoin's concept is so unnerving... how do execs like Altman seriously believe in projects like this?
Hopefully he (or a government entity) buries this invasive cryptocurrency for good. There's no reason anyone should have to trust a corporation to get a "universal" basic income.
Your comment is very observant though. I think someone may have seen the phrase "lower-income" and a big image of a black man, then thought his culture was getting erased... lol
What terrible bait, like I'm speaking directly to a man who's sold ads for three decades. "Boring" ads? No one wants to be served ads that manipulate them with "fun" (and we know that what you really mean is "serve the most attention-stealing customer-conversion media"). I won't believe that people consume digital ads by the Meta corporation for fun.
Jeez Magdalene, you ask so politely but as one of the many young men you described as "displacing their sexual desires, relying entirely on porn or other online stimuli," I could have used some tips or something because you sure make it sound like it's easy for you
Yeah. OpenAI is apt to force filters on their transformers' outputs. A year or two ago they threatened to kill AIDungeon after discovering that users were generating unsettling text with it. Since AIDungeon was built off the back of GPT3 and GPT2.5, they had no choice to comply, which led to developers and temps manually reading users' stories after they were flagged for "harmful content." That harmful content filter is very similar to what you see on chatGPT. Users screamed their privacy concerns, and the product became noticeably "worse" at generating prose/stories.
Most users used the same phrasing you have - the AI was "crippled." Shortly after, alternatives that at least claim to not invade your privacy sprang up, and I see much less of AIDungeon today.
OpenAI does not support the free use of their technology. As always, don't be fooled by the "Open" in the name. If you or your product does something they, or Microsoft, dislikes, your access could be revoked anytime. It seems unlikely to me they'd change their outlook now
First time I've seen Gas, suppose I'm out of the target demographic now.
As someone who's made a lot of internet friends on Discord over years of use, I get the nagging feeling that this app hinges on the premise that receiving e-compliments (that the app writes for the users) minimizes the workload needed to give a youth internet validation. Internet validation is rather addicting and (in my experience) debilitating for youths that allow themselves to become hooked on it. Almost all youths aren't aware of this, it is not taught to them.
That said, there aren't enough compliments in our world, especially for those suffering through highschool. If Gas avoids aggressively pursuing its users' engagement like more popular social platforms, I find it foolish to condemn software that aims to help kids feel comfortable in their own skin. I know a past self who would've given a whole lot for something like this.
"Is a Horseless Age Coming" is the story directly beneath it... another story with nerve-wracking relevance if you rewrite it about the rapidly-progressing-and-soon-to-be-omnipresent technology of today as opposed to 1900.
I'm a very young millenial, probably a year or two older than the other Gen Z replier. As of late I've really been able to resonate with feeling as though other people, especially those at my age range (the "ipad generation"), struggle to converse outside of the "stuff they like" - their comfort zone. It's very frustrating, and it makes me feel as though I can't relate to others as easily. I've often wondered if this mindset is brought on by reliance on social media to only feed you more content that is "stuff you like."
I've also come to feel, though, that conversation is not at all a human instinct. It's a skill to be honed like any other, but it isn't clearly valued on our society. Guitar, painting, writing blog posts, or any other skill which can be used as a personal medium of expression are almost completely cut out from the education system in favor of only presenting common core topics which are mostly inapplicable and unhelpful to the average citizen.
Humans want to express themselves, but I feel as though we're rapidly running out of unique ways to do so - or at least, ways that feel unique in a world of billions. When people are talking about "stuff they like," I feel as though it's a symptom of them not having the skills that they need to express their humanity, and to understand your own. It's not even really their fault... no one taught them, they just haven't figured it out on their own yet.
When there's no guarantee that humans kicked out into the world at 18 will have any idea of how to relate to other people's human experiences... how can you expect them to be any good at conversing with you? All we have is our soul anyway, as Socrates once taught us, so we each stand to benefit from knowing how to talk about it.
If you feel like you're too good at [the guitar] for your [band], bail. If you'd feel even better enabling them for a lifetime to express themselves better through [music], then pour your heart into teaching them. But there are many other people out there who are very, very skilled at [making music], and if [making great music] is a true driving force for you, then you have to go and seek it out.
Mix and match the words in the brackets for advice on any skill you can only practice with other people, especially conversation :3
That's my experience and philosophy at least, and I think it's really been helping me through some agonizing feelings as of late. I'm sorry that you've had such frustrating experiences just trying to relate to people, I know the feeling and it's totally soul-sucking.
Powerful prose. And my reading of you is that we are getting what we want, for a certain base level of we. And because we prioritize for the base, the outsider passions are increasingly estranged and neglected.
