“This is about much more than just getting your website indexed in their results. This is about recognising large language models as the ultimate influencer”

My new personal assistant told me there is nothing to worry about so this is fine i guess.

Seriously, when are these bourgeoisie fucks gonna realize that any system designed to coerce or manipulate is inherently corrupting its own ability to be trustworthy, ethical or qualitative.

And just like that i went from being absolutely uninterested since inception into kinda wanting one.

Once they are bought out by the singular mega corporation you will have only few choices left.

• Learn to love their products

• Sit idle in the dust because without their product you cannot partake in society.

• Join an OpenClan and become a technomage

I am opposite to this.

Present day Google IS chrome and as much as i am disgusted by them and want them broken up forcing a sale of chrome does not make sense and could actually spiral into the collapse of the company. (Don’t threaten me with a good time)

All internet platforms want a… well platform to have users on. An interface/environment that in its most profitable form can be plastered with ads.

For the google of old this used to be its search engine website.

But it sucks now, the web has kept growing and most people only need a different tiny fraction of it.

Yes its dominant, but its getting increasingly bad and will get increasingly useless as we start using smarter ai to filter (not re-generate) the web to our needs.

This is why openai wants to buy chrome, they want to replace all that google was with themselves.

Google also have their workspace platforms but there are no standalone apps. They are inherently designed for in browser use.

All of this means it makes a lot of sense they have a clear incentive to want to control the browser. Because its the frame that contains almost everything they do.

Compare that with microsoft, who owns the majority of operating systems, the entire office platform, and is also still competing with a search engine. And they still get to integrate edge like a glue no one asked for?

Burn both these corpos but the logic applied here makes no sense.

I am purposely ignoring all the other projects, robotics, Because honestly half of them never get to product and they don’t really effect the identity of theirs business as much.

If anything it would make more to sell these other projects like autonomous cars, you know they are just going to try take over taxi services first and delivery services second if they get to keep that.

I never started “beneficial”

Its entirely possible that ai agents build, regardless of whose interest, keep running after their original owner dies.

If the job is “become an industrialist, expand and drop % of all profits on this bank account” and its actually competent it could lead to industry itself being more and more monopolized by fewer and fewer ai.

That would halt the status quo where many human agents create companies for different reasons and industry is an ethical melting pot. Thats what i meant.

Till that point in time the morality of ai businessmen is not different in effect then a human businessmen. Once that point. This morality shifts into either extinction or thrive for humankind.

I actually replied a similar thing to someone else.

Here i am specifically speaking about the bureaucratic path a non human could use to obtain person rights.

Both are true.

The first ai companies will be prompted by Humans.

A vast majority will be for profit. People want the ai to do the hard company work and collect the profit in their sleep as “owner” of the ai agent.

A good few people will do exactly the same but request non profit style and ethical focus.

Till we get to a mythical stage of agi that can actually decide globally if it thinks a company should exist or not and what purpose it should have, this is more or less same as the status quo.

Its only a matter of time till we get companies run entire by AI.

We kept asking in scifi if ai could ever be given the status of a legal human.

We failed to ask if capitalism has already build in a bureaucratic loophole that just gives it to them.

Actual shudders when i received this response.

You got paired up with a vegetable as teammate?

Is it ripe for harvest time yet?

Or worse, real digital art of living people being stolen, watermarked, and sold for pure profit.

For new users the main question is not what operating system but what window manager as that is what shapes day to day user interaction. KDE plasma is a solid choice.

Installing it on a separate drive should be no problem. Just select the correct drive during install.

I use F10 to get to the boot menu on drive and select the drive it needs to boot from there. I have used it once in the last year and although it required many updates its still working.

Most of these things have a free tier. I would be hardly suprised if roblox doesn’t.

As someone who does know a lot about the industry i simply cannot recommend roblox. However i can recommend the following:

Make an account tougher with your daughter and let her play in the living room, streamed to the tv if you can and let her guide you trough what this game is and what she finds fun about it.

Bonding aside there is a good chance that the free tier is all she needed and the real fun is connecting multiplayer with her real life friends.

Sooner or later you will face some examples of the traps and dangers, but those are generally the same ones that exist everywhere online, at which point you can let your daughter explain the supposed purpose of em while directly complimenting it with your parental insight. This helps you set and explain boundaries in relation to the game and helps build resilience to the inherent risks of the digital age.

Amen on preventing the normalization of fascism and on trying to split the unthinking mass the same as the Nazi intellectual.

But i am a bit confused about the argument here. I believe you are in favor of calling for violence against fascism in a wider sense. And therefor interpret ops message in the same way.

I am in a somewhat mirrored perspective where i feel strong about pacifism and freedom of speech. Words can hurt but to me can be never be labeled as violent, so i read op as valid but colorful expression. They also themselves express that they do not see their own message as a call to violence.

Fascism is naturally abhorrent, but how does threatening fascist expression show that abhorrence to those trapped within? If our threat is general and op meant indeed a call to violence against all including non violent fascist express then we do the opposite of splitting those groups and actually mostly the unthinking will be targeted. Then Violence calls for more violence and only those rich enough to fly away will be unharmed.

In an academic sense i agree with you that this is how fascism is and that there is logic to it they wont want to pursue a scenario where they do not have the hierarchical upper hand in a violent clash.

However i doubt this is how most modern fascists are and how its ideology spreads. I am willing to bet that the vast majority of Americans neo nazis don’t even know who Mussolini is. The “leopards ate my face” phenomenon is a result of this. So is the “local known immigrant good, stranger immigrant bad” They are essentially brainwashed into the ideology of hate without truly understanding what it is about. They are equally brainwashed to distance themselves or look away from the people around them that do commit violence.

When asked in the streets supporters of trumps deportation plans expressed its only natural that said thing was done in a humane and ethical way and they trust those that execute such plan achieve this. When they do witness violence from their side they believe the victim must have deserved it in some horrible way. Only a small minority understands and expresses a desire to kill just because of ethnicity.

To me the entire war rhetoric between political left vs right is a function of the greater fascist ideal. While we are occupied fighting fascist appearing neighbors, those in power with the money and means to instruct real systematic oppression, censorship and in control of the state monopoly on n violence are not being stopped.

deleted by creator

Thats is in all honesty not how i read ops message though.

They want to make the dynamic where the organizers of ethnic cleaning are held accountable a set tradition. And the only names in context are Mussolini and Hitler.

The crux of this argument may be what we understand as an active Nazi.

To me Musk is an active Nazi, he speaks their ideology and caters to others that also do and employed its symbolism. But there is no proof that he is or was involved in organizing genocide.

So i don’t think op is saying Musk deserves death (yet).

I also see many people who are openly racist and identify as Nazis. Spread hate. But don’t actually engage in violence. Many of these are indoctrinated or born in such culture. I don’t think they are a target for OP either.

I agree that some of these can decide to stop. which bring me to my truer understanding that these most of these people can learn to be better. Which is exactly my argument not to punish them with violence.

But the organizers who set the machines of death in motion cannot be redeemed this way. Hitler if he was alive can not be pardoned and given acces to the public world. We as a society must come to a consensus what to do with criminals like that.

Spending the remainder of their life in a maximum oppressive system with zero freedom is not a perfect solution. Neither is putting them to death. Both of these options can be supported with ethical arguments, there is no objective winner. Till we find ethical argument for an options that is objectively superior to both ,showing support in favor of the existing solutions is fair and has nothing to do with threatening someone.

I agree the sentiment of a public hanging doesn’t help to see it that way, but language is by default colors to carry emotional value and not only literal value.

I feel similar to “eat the rich” getting banned. No one who states that is seriously advocating for cannibalism.

Yeah that seems to check out.

Wikipedia states he is imprisoned for life for the crime of genocide.

That outcome personally has my preference but to bring it to the matter at hand.

Op basically suggest that rather then incarceration for life they should be given the death penalty.

I cant see such thing as a threat. Because in so many “modern” places its the status quo. Definitely not as a offending expression to be banned.

Til the day we as a species evolve to a post death penalty world without state monopoly on violence such discussion are as normal as humanity itself.