Independent thinker valuing discussions grounded in reason, not emotions.
Open to reconsider my views in light of good-faith counter-arguments but also willing to defend what’s right, even when it’s unpopular. My goal is to engage in dialogue that seeks truth rather than scoring points.
Technically, it’s ‘mute,’ not ‘block.’ In most cases, blocking not only prevents you from seeing their content but also them from seeing yours.
What Twitter is being criticized for here is changing blocking to work similarly to how it does on Lemmy, with the exception that you still couldn’t engage with content from users who have blocked you, whereas on Lemmy, you can.
It’s being argued that ‘weakening’ the block feature in this way makes stalking and harassment easier.
Nothing. That’s all I need it for.
Blocking on Lemmy does nothing else but hide that user’s posts and messages from you
Every time someone makes a blanket demand like ‘everyone just get off Twitter,’ and I ask why I should, the answer is more or less: ‘I don’t like Elon, so I don’t want anyone using his platform.’
I’ve yet to figure out why I should care how somebody else feels about what I do online. I don’t like TikTok either yet I don’t go around telling people to get off the platform.
So even after this update, the block feature on Twitter is still more effective than it is on Lemmy, yet nobody seems to be complaining about that.
You have data caps on your broadband connections in the US? Does your phones have rotary dials too?
I can’t believe how little news coverage there has been about this. Seeing that thing land was probably the most impressive thing I’ve ever seen.
It wasn’t the first starship launch but it was the first where they tried to land onto the chopsticks. Last time I believe they simulated the same thing but landed in the ocean instead. They did get just one try with this particular rocket since if it was unsuccesfull the rocket would now be in a million pieces.
That’s not a claim, it’s the name of the company. I’m not aware of Altman being the one who even came up with it.
What does?
How dare you imply that humans just make shit up when they don’t know the truth
…or you can just keep watching videos from human creators like you have done so far. If the content you’re consuming is already the kind that’s difficult to tell from AI in the first place then not much will change.
What’s an example of a claim Altman has made that you’d consider bullshit?
It’s a common tactic of news outlets to choose bad pictures of people they’re against and good pictures of people they’re for. Once you see it, it cannot be unseen.
That was the most impressive thing I think I’ve ever seen
The current AI discussion I’m reading online has eerie similarities to the debate about legalizing cannabis 15 years ago. One side praises it as a solution to all of society’s problems, while the other sees it as the devil’s lettuce. Unsurprisingly, both sides were wrong, and the same will probably apply to AI. It’ll likely turn out that the more dispassionate people in the middle, who are neither strongly for nor against it, will be the ones who had the most accurate view on it.
Just slapping on a lidar doesn’t simply solve that issue for you either. Making out individual objects from the point cloud data is equally difficult plus you’re then having to deal with cameras too because Waymo has both. I don’t see how you imagine having Lidar and cameras would be easier to deal with than just cameras.
Also. Tesla already has more or less solved this issue. FSD works just fine with cameras only and new HW4 models have radar too.
The S&P500 index doesn’t speculate about whether a company’s stock is over- or underpriced. It’s a market-cap-weighted index, meaning the weight of companies like Tesla is based on their market value, not an estimation of their future performance. Speculating about whether a stock is overvalued is something actively managed funds do, but the S&P500 is designed to passively reflect the largest U.S. companies based on size.
Tesla is 1.44% of S&P500. They don’t pick the companies onto their index based on emotions. Hopefully you’ve shorted them like crazy since you’re so sure about them going bust.
Exactly. The current rate is 80 deaths per day in the US alone. Even if we had self-driving cars proven to be 10 times safer than human drivers, we’d still see 8 news articles a day about people dying because of them. Taking this as ‘proof’ that they’re not safe is setting an impossible standard and effectively advocating for 30,000 yearly deaths, as if it’s somehow better to be killed by a human than by a robot.