Fedditor385

But, DeepSeek wouldn't be able to make money without using OpenAI.

Same what OpenAI said about copyright material they used to train ChatGPT.

The time of rational discussions is over. THAT is what needs to be accepted. Being rational was tried and it failed, thats why we are here where we are in the first place, remember? If being rational was of any help, we wouldn't have the problem that we had today. We rationally told we can't accept so many migrants, provide them with basic stuff, without it affecting ourselves. But no, nobody listened. Why would anyone wanna be rational now? We tried and it failed. Nothing else left but to be emotional.

Of course it's not rational, why would you expect it to be at this point? When an issue starts, at that point, before it escalates, thats when people still have rational thoughts and think through things. But now, where the economy is falling apart, people are losing jobs and homes, or barely making it through, why would you expect anyone to be rational and not emotional? How do you expect such people, who contributed their whole life to the states welfare system when it was working, to now at this point be left in the dark while some random people, who just got here, never put a penny into that system, get everything on a silver pladder? Of course people will get emotional, and in this case, the emotion is hate, remorse, fear, disappointment.

I really don't know what would else you expect from people in this desperate situation.

Well, I partly agree. Collective freedom does come before personal freedom. But, not everyone hates just because of the "being". For ex. a lot of refugees in Germany are hated not because they are from middle east, not because they are islamic, but for the sole reason that they are abusing the welfare system. They get free social apartments with monthly allowance that is higher than some peoples pensions, from which they still need to pay their apartment. It's not hate because of what they are, but because of what they do. And that is ok, because we hate pedophiles not because of the person, but because what they do or did in the past. Also, there is no freedom from feeling offended and unwelcome. It is a feedback. A boy can feel unwelcome in a girls locker room, no problem there really. Feeling unwelcome probably has some reason behind it. You either should not be there, or you should be or not be doing something.

It IS censorship and they should stop saying it isn't, but they should clearly say "we will censor X because Y" and be transparent about it. Censorship where the majority of population agrees with it is still censorship, but approved and accepted for the greater good.

Now, the question is what does "hateful" mean? And where does "hateful" start and begin? Is saying "I hate my neighbour" and "I hate Nazis" the same? Is "I hate gay people" and "I hate Manchester United" the same? Why not focus on violence instead of hate. We should have the freedom to hate (hear me out...) but in the end it is a feeling and a preference and no censorship will change that. What should be prevented at all costs however, is violent content. People can love or hate whoever, but they shouldn't be allowed to call upon any type of violence towards them.

Someone hating someone doesn't change a thing, but someone calling for attacks against someone - this is a whole new dimension and deserves total censorship.

There is no GDPR outside of EU.

Well how do you expect people to both make money and provide stuff for free?

Asking people to do something will never work, telling people how something is better will trigger their curiosity to at least take a look.

It's literally a fork. Open some files, they are exactly the same. Someone just exported easy notes and then uploaded it again with different icon and name so people won't immediately see it's a fork.

Guess we should all be unemployed not to be oppressed.

What immense power? You can hand in your resignation and all that power, money and piles of gold suddenly mean nothing when you don't have the basic component that makes the gears turn. Workers are also not oppressed, because workers can quit if it's not fitting for them. Staying there by free will to take the shit in is not oppression... We already have very mobile workforce that basically does job jumping every 2 years, and people are having less and less issue with simply quitting. So what is exactly the problem for the worker, expect that they want to work in a company, but on THEIR terms, and not the company terms?

Not defending Amazon in any way, but I think the playing field is quite level right now between the employer and employees. Both are free to make decisions, both are free to work together or part ways. So I am not seeing an issue other than the worker wanting to control how the company is run.