FWIW there’s a way to bridge Bluesky accounts to Mastodon

https://fed.brid.gy/

I have qualms about casting Harris as a “career” politician. He first election for DA was in 2003. To get from running for DA to running for US President in 21 years is a very short ride. She was born in 1964.

Hell, Trump ran for President (Reform Party) in 2000, so he’s been a “politician” longer than Harris. So if she’s a “career politician,” then so is he.

Not that there’s anything wrong with being a politician for a long time, as long as the politician is serving her constituents to their satisfaction and avoids corruption.

my point is that “if there’s an obstruction, stop” means these cars are going to be stopping and requiring human intervention all the time. That’s semi autonomous at best.

I don’t know if you’ve encountered intransigent geese in your driving adventures, but the only way to deal with them is to slowly drive through the flock until they move out of your way.

fully autonomous cars are never going to happen without major changes to our roads. we’d be better off investing in more busses and trains.

I realized self-driving on roads is impossible for so-called when someone pointed out what human drivers do when there’s like a flock of geese camped out in the middle of the road.

We know that we should slowly move forward until they get out of the way, including bonking then with the car (gently). Do we want cars deciding that some obstruction in the road is “ok” to hit? I don’t. So what’s the solution? Something other than pure autonomous self driving.

We can probably have some very high level driver assist. Maybe.

Well to be fair if we just go full ham with crypto mining and so called AI, we’ll belch enough GHGs into the atmosphere that the actual climate apocalypse will come within 20 years or so, wiping out most of human so called civilization, which will put the climate on a path to resetting over the next couple hundred thousand years.

Solved!

This is Zuck’s characterisation. No direct quotes. No attachments (that I’ve seen). He calls it pressure. He says they wanted to censor “satire & humor.” In fact this BS letter is what the original article quoted.

I love how he just uncritically and with absolute credulity accepts excerpts from a letter written by Zuck with no supporting evidence, no examples of what “pressure” looked like, etc.

I can’t believe these people are still so butt hurt about the perfectly reasonable actions taken by the US and State governments and governments worldwide in response to a once in a century global respiratory DEADLY pandemic that killed millions and millions of humans.

And as far as FB (and other social media) goes, fuck em. And fuck the users. Types of speech can be illegal. Defamation (lying about someone) and false advertising (lying about a product or service) can be illegal even though it’s definitely speech. These have “lying” in common, which to me implies there must be something about lying (specifically misrepresenting reality) that weakens typical 1st Amendment protections.

But it’s clear what this guy is most sad about is the traffic he got while his article about Woodstock going on during a lull in the comparatively mild pandemic that was “active” at the time (no meaningful H3N2 activity in the US at the time) went away when FB rightly changed the algorithm to not boost his stupid irrelevant “analysis.”

But people like the writer of this article are either too addled by conspiracy galaxy brain or too committed to lying for money to care that they could really hurt people with their bullshit.

This guy needs to go to something less harmful like selling homeopathic tinctures or lying about the moon landing or flat earth or something.

Guys I found JD’s Lemmy account…

The behavior doesn’t stop but it does start with the crazy growth spurt in height that is pretty unique to teenage boys (AMAB). Suddenly things that were way out of reach become reachable, like in the course of 6 months.

Someone should tell this guy that hot dogs exist.

This genie is probably impossible to get back in the bottle.

People are going to just direct the imitative so called AI program to make the face just different enough to have plausible deniability that it’s a fake of this person or that person. Or use existing tech to age them to 18+ (or 30+ or whatever). Or darken or lighten their skin or change their eye or hair color. Or add tattoos or piercings or scars…

I’m not saying we should be happy about it, but it is here and I don’t think it’s going anywhere. Like, if you tell your so called AI to give you a completely fictional nude image or animation of someone that looks similar to Taylor Swift but isn’t Taylor Swift, what’s the privacy (or other) violation, exactly?

Does Taylor Swift own every likeness that looks somewhat like hers?