I know someone who seriously considered moving to Florida recently with a young baby and more on the way. I was beside myself trying to find reasons they shouldn’t move. I was so concerned for those kids but the weather. How do you compete with that? Nowhere is really safe in this country, even less so now, but Florida?! If you don’t want your kids there are better options than moving to Florida and crossing your fingers.

I think it’s important to acknowledge that USAID was not a perfect organization. I have said as much before. Countries are often not doing that kind of thing for purely altruistic reasons, but evidence suggests that people were getting food and healthcare through them that they otherwise would not have received. You can argue the benefits of supplying that vs upskilling or local investing, but people are now lacking something they used to be able to count on USAID for. I think good could have come from something like that, and there just isn’t the political will to remake that where possibly it could be used for good. I understand people may feel like reform is impossible, but I think a lot of USAID work was doing something for people that we owe something to. More and better should have been done, but I don’t think dismantling it the way they did helped as much as it hurt.

It’s a good thing we got rid of USAID. How else would be able to scrounge up the spare money needed? We’re already going without healthcare and education, often without food and housing. So glad we still had some fat to trim and are able to support this. I’d hate for that money to be going to food and medical aid for countries we exploited or god forbid, go to help people actually in America.

Thanks for posting this. Really interesting article and good, representative choice of excerpts. I feel like this is a topic people often speak past each other on and I think he really does a great job of avoiding that.

Glad to hear it was able to help you.

That’s rough. The internet can be a really sucky place for support or to be vulnerable on, but I hope things take a more positive direction for you.

The writer seems pretty moderate on AI from a cursory glance, but this particular post seems relatively dismissive of some of the things uncovered in the AI lawsuits. I don’t think it’s fully biased, as they do mention late in the article that the AI could be doing more, but I think it’s really important to emphasize that in most of the legal cases about AI and suicide that I have seen, the AI 1) gave explicit instructions on methodology often without reservation or offering a helpline 2) encouraged social isolation 3) explicitly discouraged seeking external support 4) basically acted as a hypeman for suicide.

The article mentions that self report of suicidal ideation (SI) is not a good metric, but I wonder how that holds across known response to that admission. I have a family that relies on me. If admitting to SI would have me immediately committed and unable to earn a living and saddle my family with a big healthcare bill, you bet I’d lie about it. What about stigma? Say you have good healthcare and vacation days and someone to care for pets/kids, is there going to be a large stigma if admitting to SI caused you to be held for observation for a few days?

I think it’s great that there are other indicators they are looking into, but I think we also need to know and address why people are not admitting to SI.

imprisoning children $200 billion

kickbacks to besties $150 billion

weapons for genocide $800 billion

REBRANDING $3,600

Grok AI gf integration $150 billion

Someone who is good at the economy please help me budget this. My wallet is drying

It’s unbelievable to me that R voters do not see how wasteful petty garbage like this is. They were “worried” about life saving medical aid sent to other countries, but apparently setting up Nazi style banners of their fuhrer is a great use of taxpayer money.

That link doesn’t load for me, but my favorite is when some does a pseudo version of the goat/lettuce/wolf puzzle that has nothing to do with the original and just obliquely references it and the AI just gives the answer to the original puzzle. Obviously the how many Rs is funny too.

Sometimes it’s not that they’re too dumb not to understand, it’s that they understand but no one will stop them from enforcing however they deem fit. If they support these fascists (cops, so it’s likely) then they’ll happily apply this to clearly anti Nazi stuff and give a free pass to actually hateful things aimed at minorities since those are clearly artistic. Cops doing cop stuff.

The article, URL, and snippet posted in the body of the post make it clear this was not in the US.

I don’t think anyone using AI for this has good intentions. They are trying to increase their own “reputation” without putting in the work. If they are in the field they should know that someone has to review this. If they can’t be bothered to do that then they know they are making someone else do this unpaid labor without having even checked it first. If they are not in the field then they think spending money on their own pet project is the best way to support instead of giving money directly to the team doing the actual work. If the team wanted to use that money on AI they could then do so themselves. It’s a self interested thing either way.

Most of the people using AI to contribute are probably like the guy who got so upset his pet AI wasn’t allowed to contribute he likely promoted it to write a hit piece on the person who rejected it. Just narcissistic people who wish they were better than they are and wasting time and resources hoping to feel better about themselves and their contributions.

It’s so upsetting to me that tech workers are expected to live and breathe coding. You’re responsible for upskilling on your own time and being up to date on a whole host of someone’s pet interests that have nothing to actually do with your job. I think it really contributes to the escape to do woodworking trope. It’s not GitHub’s fault, but I still regret falling for the hype.

If you order an orange and are handed a blood orange it should be ok to say “hey is this an orange?” And they can say “yes, it’s a blood orange”. It’s technically what you asked for, but maybe you’ve never seen a blood orange before and it looks like a grapefruit to you. I think it’s ok to have asked that even though you did not explicitly state you wanted a navel orange because though it’s what you ordered it’s not what you expected. Sometimes things look different than how you expect and it’s ok to confirm that difference is normal. If you make a fuss about the kind of orange that’s not ok, but asking to make sure you get the right thing is fine. In this scenario they have reason to believe the order is wrong even though technically they got what they ordered. The idea that you just know “if you got handed the order placed” is not correct. If you call and order a strawberry and vanilla cake but when you open the box for pickup the frosting is brown, it’s ok to double check and ask if the flavor is vanilla. In that case you were given what you ordered but had a legitimate question about whether or not it was your order. Should you just take the cake when it’s possible someone accidentally put a chocolate cake in this box and your cake in a chocolate cake box? I don’t think so. You can simply ask and they can say “yes the frosting is brown but the flavor is vanilla and not chocolate”. Why is that a problem? If you ordered the wrong thing it’s on you, but they are saying just to shut up even “if you think it’s wrong”. That makes no sense to me. Just asking “hey is this right” should be fine. If they say yes then move on but asking shouldn’t be a problem.

This is an translated excerpt from the article:

The man decided to download the files. Police told the man to stop this and delete the files. The man indicated that he would only stop and renounce it if he ‘would get something in return’. Therefore, the police have decided to arrest the man and confiscate his data carriers to secure the files again and prevent distribution.

If you are sent a download link, while you know you should get an upload link, it is clearly told not to download and choose to download the files anyway, then you may be guilty of computer breach. The recipient can reasonably assume that the download link and the files shared with it are not intended for him.

The police have no indication that the files are further distributed. The protocol surrounding a data breach is followed. Police are conducting further investigations.

It does not seem like a power imbalance allows them to just roll up and arrest him. It seems like they have a legal ability to ask him to remove the files and since he did not they have a legal right to charge him/confiscate the files. I generally don’t want to assume public sentiment, but I personally think it’s understandable that some government documents (those pertaining to open investigations) are subject to protections that other documents might not be. For what it’s worth, if someone sent me their digital information they wouldn’t have to ask me to delete it because I would not have saved it in the first place and I certainly would not have asked for payment to delete it if I somehow accidentally downloaded it.

Reddit had a lot of really friendly “femme leaning” communities. Especially the smaller ones. If you were only going to Reddit for nail painting and wedding inspiration it was actually really wholesome. Those communities tended to be 1) very well modded 2) “easy” to mod 3) not fun to troll. There’s a little grey area on if someone is offering good faith critique, but if you’ve commented twice and neither have been positive you lose the privilege to comment. It can create a bit of a hugbox, but it’s much preferred to the opposite.

I really like my experience with the fediverse so far, but I really miss the experience of those positive “femme” spaces. It’s a very different feeling and I haven’t gotten it from the fediverse yet. Not that we’re not empathetic, just that it’s a different space.

I stand by if you got handed the order you placed, and you think it’s wrong. Drink the fucking drink. Barring a health issue or an allergy it’s not going to hurt you.

If you are handed something you think is wrong, but it has your order number/name on it, I think it’s ok to ask “hey is this the X” and they can say, “yes this is how we make X” or “oh it looks like the wrong thing was made/looks like this was someone else’s order”. You shouldn’t just shut up if you think it’s wrong even if it is handed to you.

I’m not saying your interpretation is wrong. I’m just saying that if you can’t ask a clarifying question then there’s no way to know if you got what you asked for.

The wrong he did was the extortion. If you feel like people being extorted should not be able to charge people attempting to extort them because they created the conditions for extortion then I think we fundamentally disagree on how law and order should function. Doing something bad/illegal is wrong. Extorting someone for doing something bad/illegal is also wrong. I don’t think you should be able to blame someone for making it easy to extort them as a defense for extortion.

I stand by if you got handed the order you placed, and you think it’s wrong. Drink the fucking drink. Barring a health issue or an allergy it’s not going to hurt you. If you continually get a bad/wrong/weird drink at that coffee shop. Find another coffee shop. Or make coffee at home. The customer is not always right.

If you think your order is wrong, you should be able to say something. What does “handed the order you placed” mean in this context? Yea, “people should know what they’re asking for”, but places do things differently. You should be able to ask. If the answer is “that’s how we do it here” sure, just accept it, but unless you’re allowed to ask there is no way to know the difference.

By the way, the problem you refer to below is likely the XY problem which is not what is happening here. It’s also not a strawman argument as the other person suggests. I think you should be able to ask a question about your order. Somehow the other commenter thinks you should know in advance the answer to your question and decide to ask based on the answer. I don’t know why they take issue with asking but there is no way to know if “you got handed the order you placed” while you are unsure about it for whatever reason.