FaceDeer

joined 2 years ago
[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I could see it being useful for keeping the sun off, serving as a refuge from insects (depending on the local biome), perhaps serving as a changing room for privacy. But yeah, it should hardly be necessary. Just another frivolous expenditure, only do it if you can genuinely afford it.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 38 points 1 year ago (9 children)

A couple of weeks back there was an article making the rounds of the fediverse about how people with reasonably decent incomes were nevertheless living "paycheck to paycheck", and a number of examples were given in the article with their individual stories of woe about how they were baffled by how burdened with debt they were. Most of those stories, when you dug in with just a slightly critical eye instead of an automatic assumption of victimhood, revealed people making foolish choices to take on debt and support the maximally lavish lifestyle that they could manage.

The comment section was weird. It turned out that there were some people there who thought this was perfectly reasonable, giving examples of "necessary expenditures" from their own lives that were just as excessive when examined. If you think that building a deck or buying a new bed simply because it's "time for a new one" are necessary expenditures then it's kind of hard to be sympathetic when you complain about how you have no money for long-term savings.

Is there just some basic personality type that finds it hard to be responsible with money, or is this a failure of education somehow? I have ideas for how to help but help will be unwelcome by people who refuse to recognize that they have a problem.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Sounds like a purity spiral may be revving up.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Better than having people get convicted based on fake evidence, though.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It was public on kbin, which is the project that mbin forked. They changed mbin to hide the downvotes. I think that was a mistake, personally.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 28 points 1 year ago (4 children)

The article opens:

When I first started colorizing photos back in 2015, some of the reactions I got were, well, pretty intense. I remember people sending me these long, passionate emails, accusing me of falsifying and manipulating history.

So this is hardly an AI-specific issue. It's always been something to be on guard for. As others in this thread have pointed out, Stalin was airbrushing out political rivals from photos back in the 30s. Heck damnatio memoriae goes back as far as history itself does. Ancient Pharoahs would have the names of their predecessors chiseled off of monuments so they could "claim" them as their own work.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah, but this doesn't put any restrictions on stuff, it just adds a label to it.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Indeed. There are lots of proposals for perfectly portable decentralized user identities, subscriptions that transcend specific instances, and whatnot, but until those things actually arrive that's not the Fediverse we're dealing with. It's a hassle having to switch instances.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

That's not working right now. I recommend saving up your strong opinions to shotgun out at once once again it is.

But I want to be angry now! :(

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's a broad spectrum between reason and murder. You could tackle them, or bonk them with a stick, or distract them with shiny objects.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah. If god's so powerful why can't he do it himself?

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

you know that a company putting a thing in their terms of service doesn't make it legally binding, right?

And you know that doesn't necessarily imply the reverse? Granting a site a license to use the stuff you post there is a pretty basic and reasonable thing to agree to in exchange for them letting you post stuff there in the first place.

hence why they all suddenly felt the need to update their terms of services

As others have been pointing out to you in this thread, that also is not a sign that the previous ToS didn't cover this. They're just being clearer about what they can do.

Go ahead and refrain from using their services if you don't agree to the terms under which they're offering those services. Nobody's forcing you.

view more: ‹ prev next ›