zeca
Doing the right thing isnt always safe... Dont get me wrong, this antiimmigration thing is disgusting, but them covering up is not a good indicator of shittiness.
Outlets shouldnt be making predictions about the future with phrases that imply certainty. Especially when accusing someone.
They were deceived? When the oulet said she lied, they were claiming to know the future. They lied.
im glad that it works for you, but my point is that we should have the right to have a non-intrusive phone just as easily as we have intrusive ones. People shouldnt be expected to learn how to unlock a bootloader, or import one of the few phone models that support these alternative roms with all security features in place. In the process of installing these roms, some people might fall into the trap of installing them from a suspicious source.
Lets clarify this.
Your principle is "The moment your opinion starts to dictate other people’s lives, it becomes invalid."
My opinion is "People should be prevented from polluting the rivers."
You say the opinion isnt dictating anything, that its our right to have clean rivers that dictates the prohibition to polluting rivers. Ok, fair, as far as the legislation isnt based on the opinions of the legislators about what should be allowed and what shouldnt. If the opinions that "using AI to judge if a suspected murderer is guilty is not good" or "people should be able to disable all 'AI assistant' features on their smartphones and not have their data constantly scanned" become popular opinions, legislature may be passed and the consequence will dictate other people's lives.
I see what you mean though that using AI or not only concerns/affects the user. But thats not as true as it may seem.
Your example is clearly them violating the rights of others.
Yes, and its my opinon that they shouldnt be allowed to do so. Not allowing people to do something does in fact dictate their lives, so my opinion should be invalid, no?
What if their use of AI affects me? Is my opinion invalid when my opinion is that you shouldnt be allowed to pollute a river that I depend on for accessing water? Have you thought about this for more than 2 seconds?
these negative comments are missing the point. Soon we may not be able to buy a phone that doesnt have an integrated intrusive ai that scans all you files. Android has one, ios has one. Whats the alternative? using lineage os or some other android rom? having to give up using banks apps and stuff that doesnt work in those roms? most people cant say no to having a phone, so lets ensure these phones arent so intrusive. lets legislate something about this...
Its the difference between maximum gayness and maximal gayness. Maximum gayness is being more gay, or at least as gay, as everybody else; while maximal gayness is not being less gay than anybody else (just as you put it). Two people with maximal gayness can have incomparable gaynessess, and thats the key thing about partial orderings, this possibility of incomparability. there could be many maximally gay people. they wouldnt be equally gay, but incomparably gay.
some members of one side are hurting the other side. the repercussions should touch only those responsible, not the whole category theyre part of.
Just to have linux be even more ruthless with its permission schemes.