Well, it’s one thing to say an ‘artificial agent’ looks at someone’s work on deviant art and learns from it. It’s another to use that to make money, as I personally can’t imagine many of the posters would have been on board with that.

Yeah, but anything you create automatically has a copyright, so for example this comment is not in the public domain. Its use is limited to the context I am using it in; that is, I expect it to be copied for federation purposes, but I wouldn’t say that AI is covered in this context, just genuine readership, moderation, and bots that are ‘part of the community’.

At least that’s the EU stance afaik. Like if I saw this comment on a billboard somewhere I’d see that as a clear breach of copyright and even privacy.

I am speaking from a German perspective, I’m not informed on how it works within your context.

But I imagine you must have something along those lines too. Obviously there are disabled people, and if those receive benefits, then what is halfway between that and not being disabled? Or is it black and white?

And it isn’t just about finances. It is also about housing and work. For example there is special housing built for people who need to live in an accessible place, say on the ground floor in the city. And larger companies are motivated to hire disabled people. I’m not sure how, perhaps through tax breaks or perhaps they are even legally obligated to have n posts for disabled people.

If your system does not provide for your needs, you might consider moving. Didn’t you say you are a coder or something? That’s an easy green card.

That’s all good but why does it sound like you’re punishing yourself by taking a pay cut and working 16 hour days? Can’t you get on disability? You can for example be 20% disabled or 40%. This will allow you to work normal hours, have a normal income and extra rights and benefits. You might want to call your municipality and ask what’s possible and get informed.

I’m not sure but I do know that my consent is worth more than my privacy.

What if there’s a bot that posts close to high value copyrighted materials? But it’s still legal due to the diffusion magic. Like I dunno Donald Duck exploring his infatuation with Darth Vader. They’ll toss their lawyers on it and perhaps improve things for everybody?

Legal Disclaimer: The characters “Donald Duck” and “Darth Vader” are proprietary and copyrighted intellectual property. “Donald Duck” is a registered trademark of Disney Enterprises, Inc., and “Darth Vader” is a registered trademark of Lucasfilm Ltd., which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of The Walt Disney Company. All rights pertaining to these characters and their associated trademarks are expressly reserved by their respective copyright owners. The references to “Donald Duck” and “Darth Vader” herein are made solely for purposes of commentary and illustration within a non-commercial context. This use does not imply any affiliation with, nor endorsement by, the owners of these copyrights and trademarks, and should not be construed as a challenge to said copyrights or trademarks.

Also I heard X is public space or sum :p

I think we have different information. What I’ve read showed that the commission had a very broad and extreme proposal just as you just mentioned. I’d definitely not be on board with that.

However the parliament’s proposal was way more restrictive. If I understood it right it’s the commission that makes proposals but the parliament can react to it and this goes back and forth. The parliament is the one in the end that turns it into law.

I’m still a newbie in this area because I wasn’t able to vote due to my circumstances until last week.

As I mentioned before this might just be a standard day at the office for them. The commission makes wide and extreme proposals. Perhaps they even survey that stuff and look at the public opinion and allow time for debate. Eventually they create a reasonable law.

Hmm I’m not under that impression, at least not from the parliament. I’m unfamiliar with the dynamic between the commission and the parliament but it might be that the commission tends to state what’s possible and the parliament then picks what they want.

It’s not a backdoor as far as I understand it and it doesn’t compromise e2ee, but a scan on a system you trust. Local or on a server you trust.

The only issue I personally have is with the error rate. It seems to be at 80%. Personally I would find any level of error a problem. I don’t see any reasonable solution with our current tech.

I’m a coder and I like my job. It just has to fit with you. You have to be zen and like fiddling around with stuff. How did you even learn to write all of that if you hate it so much?

There’s a book called what color is your parachute you might like.

You mean like a secret power motive? I’ve never sought that in the EU. Would appreciate any references.

Afaik it’s a thin margin sector. I’ve even heard of pilots paying to fly during bad periods.

Lol Facebook was too dumb to even share my father’s posts when he joined. Just kept spamming me with rage bait and posts from someone obnoxious I met at a party years before and never really had a real contact with. How is this company supposed to detect anything? To me it’s just a cesspool that provides a few people with power.

Let’s imagine the error rate would be 0%, anonimity is a right and none of the privacy tools are broken, would you be on board with it? Or are there concerns I am missing here.

I’ve asked a Dutch police officer and she said I can record someone if I feel threatened, and send it to them. But I can’t upload it to social media.

Projects that allow for clear requirements before really starting on them are clearly more likely to succeed than ones that have a higher complexity due to unknowns.

Isn’t that sort of how we work?

deleted by creator