State capitalism, but yes.
stormeuh
joined 10 months ago
I think that should be expected given the governing structure of almost all large companies, because they're dictatorships. Employees have no say over who's in leadership, and can be fired more or less without recourse. You wouldn't expect a town hall in Russia or North Korea to allow dissent, would you?
With the exception that trains do not run roughly at the same schedule through the night, which is a big plus
I haven't seen those posters, but those are also quite telling about their world view. Piracy sites can and do expose people to all kinds of nasty stuff, but everyone knows (or should know) that and they take the risk anyway. The media companies would rather assume that's because people are evil and like to steal things, than to do a little introspection and see it's their own bad service driving customers to piracy.
There's even a great case study for this in another type of media: Steam, despite its faults, has almost eradicated game piracy. Piracy is an access problem.
The way this is phrased makes it sound like more than a third (60% of 69%) of millenials only ever consume media through piracy, which I find very hard to believe. What seems more likely to me is that the survey asked people if they have ever used piracy and now they're trying to make this seem like a much bigger deal through misleading phrasing.
It is for me in Europe
Divide et impera
Sanewashing, everything, all the time.
I think many countries won't though, out of fear of retaliation from the aforementioned orange hitler. That's a stupid reason for the EU/UK not to take advantage though, because he's already made clear he will antagonize US allies whenever he pleases and invent an excuse to do it.
But current SCOTUS will gladly use this as an excuse to establish that precedent.
view more: next ›
I agree that it's editorialized compared to the very neutral way the survey puts it. That said, I think you also have to take into account how AI has been marketed by the industry.
They have been claiming AGI is right around the corner pretty much since chatGPT first came to market. It's often implied (e.g. you'll be able to replace workers with this) or they are more vague on timeline (e.g. OpenAI saying they believe their research will eventually lead to AGI).
With that context I think it's fair to editorialize to this being a dead-end, because even with billions of dollars being poured into this, they won't be able to deliver AGI on the timeline they are promising.