I’m generally against the whole anti-AI stuff these days but this makes perfect sense. There’s no way of verifying whether or not the content of an upscaled image is accurate.
The attorneys general of Indiana, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Commonwealth of Virginia, and Washington for any wondering.
Not to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but if a monopoly was powerful enough to “affect the flow of speech”, wouldn’t they try to use that power to ensure you know nothing of it?
My ipad is a glorified notebook. I don’t get any news from Apple, Google or the usual suspects because I assume it is all curated distraction bait. I learn all I need to know about how things are going by looking out my car window when driving through town. (It’s not going well)
That’s super cool and all, I’m sure that is a sufficient sample size to be well informed, but now I’m confused as to your main point.
Do you mean to imply you don’t understand the issue with Apple controlling a massive amount of information because your lifestyle is representative of the majority of people?
Or do you mean that news has no potential value and as such is not worth protecting from bad actors?
Or do you mean that because some people are less aware of and/or dont care about being fed misinformation, they are not worth protecting regardless of any damage that might have on society as a whole?
My main point is that you are expecting the impossible if you think a company with more cash on hand than the federal government is ever going to do anything but manipulate you. If anything this drama is either for show or an effort by the government to make Apple do even more of their bidding. You will never get fair and balanced reporting or non-manipulative “entertainment” from these fortune 500s. It’s a lost cause. Find independent sources and look to them with skepticism because short of seeing it with your own eyes that’s as close to the truth as you will get.
How do you like the fact that Apple news on iOS affects headlines for literally everyone due to visibility on iOS, and thus will still affect you.
Or that their ownership of AppleTV and now Apple+ puts them in direct position to edit that speech, even if you see it elsewhere and don’t know Apple did it.
Just don’t use iphones or apple products. It’s a solvable problem. I recommend books. Any history book about a great civilization can explain what is happening now better than the news or movies anyway.
Not ignoring the issue and advocating to regulation and breakup of companies that carry this level of power.
Because not buying apple does literally less than nothing to stop them when they are out there potentially purchasing entire movie studios and chipfabricators.
What, you’re never going to watch movies that Apple (later) owns, and avoid using any tech product that an Apple Silicon fab created?
No you aren’t, because how would you know unless you’re obsessively tracking all the subbrands and shell companies.
In my case, it was more of a powerwall (the cars had too many issues already), but yep; not touching anything to do with this reprehensible shitstain. I avoid giving money to such people/companies whenever it's possible.
I’d say this is anecdotally false. I live in a rural area in the US and I just keep seeing more and more teslas popping up on the road. I wonder if they are showing up at more dealerships now where more consumers have the opportunity the make an uninformed purchase? Not sure.
I feel like anyone who has done surface level research on a tesla would avoid then. I haven’t even done that and I know just from seeing articles that I didn’t even seek out that they are pretty shitty cars, even if you ignore Elon’s existence.
I live in the most Tesla filled city in the world. I’m a fucking dick to them. I’m sorry, but if you’re buying into that Nazi’s cult and I have the choice of being my usual kind self, or taking the opportunity to go ahead of you, cut you off, etc., I’m going to do the latter.
If the price is inflated someone ought to start an insurance company to cover those folks for less and arbitage themselves into vast riches for all these underserved folks. More likely the prices reflect reality and they should pay them.
I don’t know what’s going on the home owners side, but almost half of that is the highest flood insurance rate possible. (So a super high risk area) the flood rates are managed and get capped out. It’s what enrages anyone around an inland plane. My 1 every 100 year flood coverage for an overflow brook costs 75% the rate of a coastal home that’s likely to end up entirely in the ocean in the next decade.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.