_g_be

joined 3 years ago
[–] _g_be@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

The other way I've heard this described: you don't need to put this thing away, but just move it closer to where it belongs.

[–] _g_be@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yup, exploitation of labor per usual.

But when I say 'skills' I didn't mean individual coding ability, I mean like Analytics. Skills that an entire corporation wields. Monitoring weather and hiking prices for utilities during a national emergency incrementally or 'intelligently'. The way VW cheated on emissions. The way flock uses optical text recognition to read license plates and effectively creates a massive surveillance apparatus.

Use tech to do a thing, but scale it up wide and quick, abuse it before the law can catch up.

[–] _g_be@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Technology enabled new skills, and then these are used with force to gain power.

Technology enabled current skills to be done at a larger scale, essentially creating new skills that are then applied with force to gain power.

[–] _g_be@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It's just boyfish will be boyfish, nothing to see here

[–] _g_be@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)
[–] _g_be@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Your logic is basically 'I prefer it this way, so it must be the best way and everyone should conform'. You don't drop your phone, so you can't fathom that others might.

[–] _g_be@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago

Yeah it's hard to tell which way it'll go, some features get gated away as an incentive to upgrade

[–] _g_be@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The pixel line has had dedicated AI chip/functionality for several generations

[–] _g_be@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Oh so 'NUT' is not work appropriate language? Take it up with the author of NAT and with linguists

[–] _g_be@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Wait fuck this is true haha

[–] _g_be@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

This is a good point, I didn't read it that way initially

view more: next ›