I actually upvoted the comment because I agree that silencing voices (which aren’t harassing or abusive) is a bad thing, regardless of what opinion they are expressing. But downvotes aren’t the same as admins banning you based purely on difference of opinion, let’s not conflate the two. This thread is about the latter, while downvotes are just another form of free speech.

Vividly put

OMG 😂, so good! Your comment I mean, not arsenic.

Have you already taken some of these courses? Would you recommend any of them?

Congrats! Java is a good language to learn, and it’s gotten a lot better over the years. The tooling and the ecosystem are very mature. Enjoy your newly found super powers!

Ouch

Do you have a signed agreement with them on the original schedule? I don’t think it’s legal for them to unilaterally change that agreement.

Thanks for explaining! Let me explain why I disagree with this in general. I’ll share a personal anecdote, bear with me please.

So, a feminist friend shared with me a book on human trafficking for sexual exploitation written by a group of investigative journalists that she had helped translate to Serbian. It was thoroughly researched and well documented. Reading it left a mark on me and taught me things about the world that shatter the childish worldview (this was decades ago, I was a young teenager at the time).

Now, the Serbian translation was prefaced by my friend’s fellow activist who was clearly a misandrist. The preface was filled with slurs and general assumptions of complicity and guilt about exclusively men, despite the fact that even the very book the preface was for stated that men also get trafficked (though less), and that women themselves are not rarely involved in the illegal trafficking chains of operation (think Ghislane Maxwell).

Reading that preface made me feel unjustly attacked and I would have dropped the book and never got to the good, educational part, had it not been for my friend’s highest recommendation (I’m glad I stuck with it). It turns out the woman who wrote this had had bad experiences with men in her life, and used this otherwise well researched book as a vessel to vent her personal hate for men, which was borne out of her own trauma.

While it can be considered “justified” that she feels this way, this damaged greatly the overall message of the Serbian translation, which clearly took a lot of effort to research, document and write, and than translate and publish in my country. Its educational impact was greatly diminished by the editor’s choice (out of activist camaraderie, I’m assuming) to include the hateful text at the very beginning, which unjustly attacks the very audience who would most benefit by learning from the unbiased body of the book. It’s a tragically missed opportunity.

While social media exacerbates these issues (all this happened long before social media existed), and bad faith actors attempt to skew positive feminist messages, I think we shouldn’t excuse the feminist movement for some of its own failings.

To conclude, I’m a male feminist, but I think writing “all men are thrash” or “all cops are bastards”, or “all <broad group> are <slur>” in general in the public sphere is irresponsible.

I agree with most things you wrote, but one thing confuses me. You seem to suggest that writing ‘all men are thrash’ is ok in some contexts, but when spread without that context can radicalize boys?

I agree about the tactic, but I don’t feel this particular article aims to use it (though I concede the wording of the title is a bit clumsy). The final paragraph clarifies the clickbait (as it happens nowadays):

“There are already three or four influencers jockeying for position if he goes down,” he says. “He’s a symptom, not the problem.”

It would have been a better post without the “y’all are stupid” laughter at the very start (though it might probably have been downvoted even then, but maybe less, for whatever that is worth). I agree with the business part of what you wrote.

The title (click bait as it is) withholds the most important qualifier from the text of which AI we are talking about:

"“Overall, our model shows that the job loss from AI computer vision, even just within the set of vision tasks, will be smaller than the existing job churn seen in the market […]”

Sure, computer vision is important for some jobs, but it’s a much smaller subset of jobs that is really deemed protected as claimed by the study. If the knowledge has already been coded to text on the other hand, it’s a different story.

Amen, exactly.

Thank you, I love every word you wrote here! I’m an atheist when it comes to picking labels, but I think there’s potentially good things in these value systems (and bad, like with everything else that is man made). Focusing on labels is missing the point.

While the US does have a lot of soft power in influencing nations, they certainly aren’t making the rules for other countries and puppeting them.

This is a very rosy eyed statement. The “soft” power is the visible part, just the tip of the iceberg.

Agreeing about Firefox, Linux and Twitter. Like, seriously agreeing, without sarcasm.

Yes, yes and yes (I contribute money).

This should be a big story. Very very big.

Are people just triggered by the mention of the word CEO or what? Has anyone watched the video, or ppl just downvote it based on the title? It keeps being downvoted without explanation.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t care about “karma” or “likes”, I’m just baffled because I consider this video genuinely informative and educational.

I came here to type that, so I’ll just upvote yours instead. Such a versatile device, the Steam Deck!