Do you have any non-hyperbolic examples of this kind of overreach?

It’s not an insertable toy, it’s just a novelty vibrator.

I don’t think we have to choose. “Maintain your websites so you don’t get taken advantage of” and “Here’s an example of a major-world-power-affiliated group exploting that thing you didn’t do” are both pretty important stories.

TL;DR - Uhhhh… russia has been the #1 source of firmware jailbreaks and torrents for industrial software for 20+ years. Their government is so awful that their people had to figure out how to work around the world hating them.

Oh and capitalists are traitors. Burn the rich.

So… whats stopping something like sponsorblock from nixing this potentially bankrupting choice?

While the influence is much smaller than with windows or apple, it’s still there. Linux is hardened against capitalism, but if we start believing that it has no influence we set ourselves up for Debian Pro+ in the future. Just because it’s good now doesn’t mean it capitalism can’t shit all over it faster than we believe possible…

I’m sure if we spend enough time working on it, we can figure out how this is all OPEC’s fault. /s (jeeze tho I hope your friend was okay!)

You two may not be giving me enough credit for my choice of metaphors here.

Thats on the companies to figure out, tbh. “you cant say we arent allowed to build biological weapons, thats too hard” isn’t what you’re saying, but it’s a hyperbolic example. The industry needs to figure out how to control the monster they’ve happily sent staggering towards the village, and really they’re the only people with the knowledge to figure out how to stop it. If it’s not possible, maybe we should restrict this tech until it is possible. LLMs aren’t going to end the world, probably, but a protein sequencing AI that hallucinates while replicating a flu virus could be real bad for us as a species, to say nothing of the pearl clutching scenario of bad actors getting ahold of it.

Lmao, okay thats patheticly bad baiting. Come on.

YES, IT DOES, THATS MY ENTIRE POINT.

You understand that search results are different for different people, right? I’ve been a dev for… an embarrassingly long time, I’ve never heard “libreware” outside of specifically the libreoffice suite. Sorry I’m not as in-tune with the slang as you are or whatever.

Waht is “libre software”? this is a totally new term to me and searching for it has turned up nothing.

While we haven’t confirmed this experimentally (ominous voice: yet), computationally there’s no reason even a simple synthetic brain couldn’t experience emotions. Chemical neurotransmitters are just an added layer of structural complexity so Church–Turing will still hold true. Human brains are only powerful because they have an absurdly high parallel network throughput rate (computational bus might be a better term), the actual neuron part is dead simple. Network computation is fascinating, but much like linear algebra the actual mechanisms are so simple they’re dead boring - but if you cram 200,000,000 of those mechanisms into a salty water balloon it can produce some really pompus lemmy comments.

Emotions are holographic anyways so the question is kinda meaningless. It’s like asking if an artificial brain will perceive the color green as the same color we ‘see’ as green. It sounds deep until you realize it’s all fake, man. It’s all fake.