chicken

There's also the privacy angle. There should be legal ways to get around without being tracked by license plate readers.

Who needs budgets when you have terrible anxiety about spending money

Cory misrepresents the arguments (well basically hides them) in order to not have to face any material criticism and turns them into “you just don’t like these people” which frames the criticism as emotional and not rational.

Well, isn't it? IMO some of the most popular arguments against generative AI are founded in misinformation and/or don't have strong rational defenses, even though there are better arguments further down the list, but that doesn't stop anyone because in the court of public opinion rhetoric and emotion trumps rational argument. This becomes really obvious when you try to publicly confront the failings of these arguments, in most cases the discussion will devolve into personal attacks immediately as people interpret argument as support of the enemy. If Cory Doctorow is being a little weaselly and failing to lay out an ethical position with full forthrightness, that's probably because doing so is a recipe for making everyone angry at you, regardless of your views, and since he's a public figure attempting to persuade people who mostly agree with him anyway and aren't trying to think too hard it would be a stupid choice.

It would be great if we had a culture where it was safe to lay out and consider ethical ideas on their merits without holding anything back, but we just don't, and it's unfair to demand that from people who have to answer to the public because every single one of them would get crushed if they actually did it.

Because I don't trust you and shouldn't have to.

I noticed this kind of thing happening in a particular subreddit; there was a rule requiring all identifying info to be censored with the purpose of the sub not getting banned for brigading, but people disliked this and always tried to pass off censorship attempts that were as poor as they thought they could get away with.

By how they talk about people who aren't part of the conversation. Someone focuses a lot on heaping contempt on former coworkers and romantic partners, it's a bad sign.

I recently cleaned the thing and replaced the battery, such an important piece of hardware

It's wildly unreasonable either way, but the specifics,

In the seemingly AI-edited version, the main character June (center in the image above) is depicted alone, but the image extends down to her ankles. She is depicted with a bikini bottom, impossibly large hips and thighs, and boots that rise up over her knees, seemingly invoking a harmful stereotype. This is extremely distinct from June's actual depiction in the game

Seem like they do make it worse. People seeing this are going to assume the game publisher is guilty of false advertising and/or having really poor taste. If they had instead only adjusted the formatting or lighting of the ad or something it would have been less egregious.

Adblockers are not that difficult to install, so I'd guess the slice of people who really resent ads enough to actually make purchasing decisions out of spite but also who still watch them isn't that big.

Merz criticized defenders of online anonymity, saying they are "often people who, from the shadows of anonymity, demand the greatest possible transparency from others."

Dude is non-comprehending and very offended to hear it

There is no ‘safe’ level for endocrine disruptors that mimic our natural hormones.”

I think the article is probably right that headphones have these chemicals and it is a bad thing, but as someone wearing headphones a large portion of hours in the day for the past few decades I'm wondering how much risk there actually is, which it doesn't seem to weigh in on very much.

"In the new legislation, there is a defence carved out in relation to [art and literature], but the defence has to be made out first … it has to be borne out in the court process.

Free speech but only if you go to court to prove you're allowed to say it...