I can't recall who proposed it (the original phrase)
froztbyte
joined 2 years ago
yeah, which is rather lol
"please believe in meeeeeeeeeee"
afaik it's not illegal but I have a strong feeling that quite a number of Typical OpenAI Practices And Behaviours are going to inform what becomes anathema and what becomes illegal in the coming years, because ho boy
Anything to do with porn or sex work will get kicked to the curb without a second thought
can't say why but I can say this is not completely/100% true; however
but fascists and bigots will be defended up to the point where they try to restart sectarian violence
yup
please don't get me wrong, I'm not going to bat for cloudflare. the company is detestable and problematic in extremely many dimensions
in this particular case and wrt the dude himself, it indeed appears to be much about the power. in the case of the commentary FredFig references, I suspect that came through a lens of "it is bad that I can do this [where "this" is "acquiesce to societal pressure to silence people I don't wish to silence"]". didn't see the comment at the time though, so I have no idea if it was dogwhistled or what at the time
from the (current?) prick-in-chief at YC in this post:
and everyone in our industry owes a debt to open source builders
nice of you to admit it. now maybe pay down some of that debt by using sending of your piles of money to those projects
oh, what's that, you only want to continue taking from it and then charging other people service rent, without ever contributing back? oh okay then
nasb, fedi is for losers
been feeling this for a while too and wondering how to put it into words. especially in light of all the techfash, pressing climate and general market problems, etc
one of the things I've been holding onto (hoping in?) is my estimation/belief that I don't think the current state of all the deeply-fucked systems is inherently stable, or viable. as I've said here before, that very instability is part of why so many of them are engaged in trying to set things up to protect those self-same systems, as they know the swingback is coming and they want to make it as hard as possible to claw things back from them
but how long until it breaks, and with how much splash damage, are things I haven't really been able to estimate
as seen via jwz, the tail wagging the dog continues (archive) at mozilla
"if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" but the wrong way around. I guess they got tired of begging google for money?
And, for the foreseeable future at least, advertising is a key commercial engine of the internet
this tracks analogously to something I've been saying for a while as well, but with some differences. one of the most notable is the misrepresentation here of "the internet", in the stead of "all the entities playing the online advertising game to extract from everyone else"
been thinking this quite a bit too, yeah
“curated”
it shouldn’t surprise me that the dipshit who was massively involved in “solving language” doesn’t understand the meaning of words, but grrrrr
(and I say that as an armchair linguist who understands that language is as people use it (fuck prescriptivism))
as the dynamics stand they’re more enabler than victim, in the terminology of harm. and I’d argue that applies, because this shit is harmful
this was what I was thinking, too. and this particular video doesn’t even seem to make great use of it? it’s extremely milquetoast, doesn’t vary at all, and doesn’t even do anything visually interesting more than once (if that, and that it then just repeats and repeats and repeats and…)
waterfacile