So you think “expanding mineral extraction” and “create a special fund” are things they’re doing out of the goodness of their hearts? If they didn’t plan to descend on Ukraine like carrion birds they’d have given them what they need to win way earlier.
I’ll believe it when you’re a Republic again. Until then you’re all accomplises.
They are sold for LLM training sets.
Yeah NGL this sounds more like a wishlist (tailored to US imperialism), than like an actual plan.
An people have done nothing to change it. That’s the point.
I’m still waiting to see how the boat publicity stunt ends the war in Gaza. I was told it wasn’t stupid to almost get herself killed because It WiLl sEnD a MeSsAGE.
What? There’s naked yoga on YouTube, more NSFW than that?
Nobody likes fascists bro
The three answers say literally completely different things. Wtf? Lmao
Wtf is torrent
Do protests? Oh good here I thought they were doing absolutely nothing.
It’s because the ‘people’ you are talking are either propagandists or bots.
Don’t worry I had AI TL&DR it for you:
Cory Doctorow distinguishes between centaurs (humans assisted by machines) and reverse-centaurs (humans serving as appendages to machines). His core thesis: AI tools are marketed as centaur-making devices but deployed to create reverse-centaurs—workers subjected to algorithmic control and expected to catch machine errors while being blamed for failures.
The AI bubble exists primarily to maintain growth stock valuations. Once tech monopolies dominate their sectors, they face market reclassification from “growth” to “mature” stocks, triggering massive valuation drops. AI hype keeps investors convinced of continued expansion potential.
AI’s actual business model: Replace high-wage workers (coders, radiologists, illustrators) with AI systems that cannot actually perform those jobs, while retaining skeleton crews as “accountability sinks”—humans blamed when AI fails. This strategy reduces payroll while maintaining superficial human oversight.
Why expanding copyright won’t help creators: Despite 50 years of copyright expansion, creative workers earn less both absolutely and proportionally while media conglomerates profit enormously. New training-related copyrights would simply become contractual obligations to employers, not worker protections.
The effective counter-strategy: The U.S. Copyright Office’s position that AI-generated works cannot receive copyright protection undermines corporate incentives to replace human creators entirely. Combined with sectoral bargaining rights (allowing industry-wide worker negotiations), this creates material resistance to worker displacement.
On AI art specifically: Generative systems produce “eerie” outputs—superficially competent but communicatively hollow. They cannot transfer the “numinous, irreducible feeling” that defines art because they possess no intentionality beyond statistical word/pixel prediction.
The bubble will collapse, leaving behind useful commodity tools (transcription, image processing) while eliminating economically unsustainable foundation models. Effective criticism should target AI’s material drivers—the growth-stock imperative and labor displacement economics—not peripheral harms like deepfakes or “AI safety” concerns about sentience.
It is already legal. You just have to be in jail.
The US should just pull itself up by the bootstraps and find its own water rather than waiting for government handouts.
The ICC aren’t going to risk being invaded by their puppet masters. I wouldn’t hold my breath.
IQ also doesn’t equal intelligence, it is meant to predict academic and executive success.
Except sugar is bad for you. Contraceptives aren’t.
This is an awful comparison.
This is already being written down in the history books because of how devastating it is at home and abroad. You can look up Trump-Futanari inflation if you don’t believe me.