Olives @olives@qoto.org

It's not just part of the preamble now, there is a new preamble, although it is largely of the same form as the previous one.

Also, because this one was one of the arguments they made (the environmental one is more logical).

The argument of making the product worse for everyone (to try to achieve some mythical goal) is also silly (particularly when someone can just go and buy a cigarette).

It's like saying, maybe we should make every beer taste disgusting, because otherwise someone might want to drink beer.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd7n3zyp114o When you see that another country's policy is clearly not working, the thing to do is to emulate them.

Also:

There is going to be a bit more background context for "AI". I honestly find this one tiresome as I have covered "AI" ad nauseam.

There is also a potentially positive usage of "AI" technologies (this might not make it in as I'm not sure it fits with the theme of this post).

For the next update, I'm probably going to change part of the preamble to better reflect the breadth of the post (it has grown).

I'm also going to point out that the Internet is not one particular website and that censorship has not historically gone well.

More might be added.

If no one shows interest in a new master post, I'm probably not going to bother with one. These pieces take a lot of time and work... It would be fairly lengthy.

https://www.europesays.com/1557163/
Here's an interesting piece on surveillance from Estonia (although, I think this person over-estimates the capabilities of technology, there is a lot of marketing in this space to push it). #privacy

Should I make an "AI" master post? I generally write takes for this.

Some of the things I read seem potentially interesting at first glance but then they don't really tell us anything interesting so I don't really comment on them.

By this, I mean, that there might be new posts popping in, and then, the same random post will be popped in for something like the fifth time.

I see the home feed has shifted from just cycling posts from the past... roughly 24 hours to cycling ones from weeks ago onto it too (it used to do this a while ago but most of the posts lately have been cycled from the past roughly 24 hours).

Also, he spent a huge amount of money on it, and everyone ran circles around him when coming up with their own VR things (by him, I mean Zuckerberg).

Here's a product which no one asked for delivered in the driest and most boring manner possible.

The so-called "metaverse", or Facebook's one, was comically bad. The avatars didn't even have legs and it was fairly spartan.

It makes you wish the days when it was just investors hyping up cryptocurrencies or something.

While I'd say that we are now free of "the metaverse" type rhetoric from 2022, unfortunately, I've seen enough bad takes about VR (though fewer) that I had to specifically add that to my post.

One of the worst things about the "AI" products which were launched in 2022 (remember that "AI" is not a new technology) is that we now have to waste a lot of time with stupid takes, and usually the same stupid takes. It's tiresome.

I suppose one of these shills for surveillance / censorship will try to argue that Australia becoming more irrelevant in the tech world (and shrinking the economy) is somehow a "good" thing.

Also, weren't there tech companies moving from the U.K. to France? France has been behaving weirdly lately though.