This particular user is a special kind of one. Once you make the wrong noises about something they don’t like, they make it their personal mission to start digging for anything even remotely looking like dirt that they can sling your way - as they’re now demonstrating below.
Been enough for me.
It’s a pleasure to meet you! The only thing exceeding my level of wisdom is my modesty.
I don’t necessarily even disagree with this feature but I can’t help but imagine the outrage if that was almost literally any other group of people.
I’m not arguing against piracy here. I partake in it myself too.
I don’t really see that difference there. Of course the difference in scale is massive when you compare a multi-billion company doing it to an individual, but what about the harm when everyone does it as individuals versus one big company doing it? I don’t think the difference matters anymore at that point.
Doing something morally wrong can’t be justified just because only a small number of people are doing it. You wouldn’t use that defense for any other immoral behavior either. Me dumping my car’s old motor oil into the woods is still bad even if I’m the only one in my country who does it - and if I then go ahead criticizing a drilling company for causing an oil spill, I’d be just as much of a hypocrite.
That at least would be a morally consistent stance and I have no issue with that. I’m talking about the people who criticize them for pirating while doing it themselves too.
they don’t earn anything with it.
That’s not entirely true either. There’s no practical difference between saving 50 bucks and earning 50 bucks. In both cases you’re left with more money to spend. Piracy is equally a financial decision even if it’s just for personal use. You’re saving what ever amount it would’ve cost to buy that media.
I’m using theft an an example due to it being the closest equivalent. The point still stands: if it’s wrong for an company to do it at scale, then it’s wrong when an idividual does it too.
There are edge cases where you could argue piracy is morally justifiable. Those aren’t what I’m talking about here, though. I’m talking about movies, TV series, games, and software that people pirate not because they couldn’t get it elsewhere or couldn’t afford it - but simply because they want it for free. That’s the vast majority of online piracy.
The difference is only in scale. Stealing is stealing independent of if it’s for personal use or not.
You can keep the insults to yourself.
It’s virtually never the case that people genuinely can’t afford it or that it’s simply not available for purchase anywhere. In the vast majority of cases, people pirate because they don’t want to pay. It’s a financial decision that leaves them no ground to stand on and criticize others for doing the same.
Stealing is wrong whether it’s for personal or business use. Which one is more wrong is besides the point.
I’m getting the feeling that the average Lemming is a pro-piracy advocate only for as long as it’s them financially benefiting from it but the script interestingly flips when a company they don’t like does the same thing.
If money wasn’t an issue, there’s be no reason to pirate anything. It’s a financial decision. There’s no practical difference between earning fifty bucks and saving that much - in both cases you’re left with 50 more bucks to spend.
I was facetiously suggesting they use one to hide the bias already baked into the article - not to add anything that isn’t there.
Perhaps they should’ve ran this article through an LLM aswell to at least try and hide the glaringly obvious bias.
Just give me the facts and let me make up my own mind about how I feel of something.
I have no issue with an online service knowing my age for as long as that’s all they know and will ever know about me.
They are not willing to let their current models (Claude) be used in fully autonomous weapons right now, because they believe today’s frontier AI is still too unreliable and prone to errors. They explicitly say they “will not knowingly provide a product that puts America’s warfighters and civilians at risk.”
However, they have offered to work directly with the Department of Defense on R&D to improve the reliability of autonomous weapons technology in general (with our two requested safeguards in place) - so that in the future these systems might become safe and trustworthy enough to use.
They’re not ideologically against autonomous weapons systems. They’re against ones that run on our current AI models.
That’s your intrepretation - not a direct quote.
If they’re so smart then why do they have issues that my dumb dash cam doesn’t?