ParkingPsychology

No need. Homo sapiens is near the end anyway. Doesn’t matter how it ends, if we get replaced by AIs, the next "Homo geneticmodified"or get wiped out. Kind of awesome to know, right? After 250,000 years, we’re among one of the last Homo sapiens. Peak Homo sapiens.

You know what that means, “Homo sapiens”? It means “wise man”.

We’re going to get completely ridiculed for doing that in the future. Who the fuck even calls themselves “wise man”. So lame.

Exactly. It’s an odd type of gambling with your life.

They all migrate to USA in hope of getting jobs at big techs.

Eh… It’s overrated. The pay is better, but otherwise it is definitely a downgrade. Maybe from east EU, it’s a decent deal, from west EU, it’s very disappointing. You basically end up thinking “but the money is good” over and over and wanting to go back to actual civilization.

You can’t counter someones argument by just saying the same thing you know.

Sure you can. You can also win any argument by replying “no you”. You just don’t leave a very good impression if you do that.

He brings up a good point as you can in fact argue your likeness in court.

This would likely require a court case but chances are the AI law would have to offer an exception to it.

It’s probably just going to fall under existing law and the owner of the AI replaces the owner of the copy that was made (so same laws, no exception). Not sure what law that is exactly, but I assume it involves royalties and the like and there’s an exception for certain things, like news and maybe art.

Here’s an article on it from the perspective of painting. I don’t see why it would any different if it’s an AI “painter”. It’s still technically painting what it does.

Where Wansley and Weinstein break important new ground is on the other legal standard set by the Supreme Court: recoupment of losses. If Uber and WeWork and the rest of the unicorns are perpetual money losers, it sounds like the standard isn’t met. But Wansley and Weinstein point out that it can be — even if the companies never earn a dime and even if everyone who invests in the companies, post-IPO, loses their bets. That’s because the venture capitalists who seeded the company do profit from the predatory pricing. They get in, get a hefty return on their investment, and get out before the whole scheme collapses.

Yep. The venture capitalists found a loophole.

Heavy debt, he caused by overpaying for Twitter with loans with high interest rates. And now Twitter needs to somehow “make a profit”.

plans to pursue changes” that would let regular users vote moderators out more easily

I think that’s a good thing in the long run.

There is already a perfectly fine mechanism to deal with bad mods, you just go to a different sub. That approach has worked fine for many years.

There’s a reason they never added any other mechanism.

Don’t forget there are people with tens of thousands of aged accounts that are itching for ways to make money with them.