I personally dont want modes. It should be smart enough to infer my intention and act accordingly

That's all to say that there is no explicit nefarious hand crafting. Quite the opposite. These companies spend billions to avoid next level token prediction to cause harm or have unintended consequences even if that is the intention of the user. And the few examples I looked at, many of these bad examples were tried over and over to get the result they were looking for, exploiting the non-deterministic nature of LLMs.

But as a society, if we want to have nice things, we have to accept some level of people that can be swept up in the technology and have negative outcomes. People don't blame sports cars for luring drivers to drive recklessly, which is exactly what car companies do through their marketing.

So this reads to me as trial lawyers rounding up a few marginal people out of hundreds of millions of users and chasing these companies because they have hundreds of billions of dollars and they take a huge share. That's not to say that AI girlfriends are good or desirable but it's obviously a money grab with no real resolution except government controlled AI, which will have the same problems as today just there will be immunity from these kinds of lawsuits and censorship.

Are cars authorized to run people over?

Are painkillers "authorized" to get people to overdose?

Are computer chips "authorized" to be put into bombers?

What are you even talking about?

Unfortunately warfare is a thing. Why wouldn't you want the best technology used for your country when conducting warfare? Or do you just believe warfare would cease to exist if a country gave up any means of defense or offense?

DVD Inbox and Cafe DVD is $20/mo for 2 discs at a time, with unlimited discs and a 5 day guarantee. 5 days to get your DVD doesn't seem great. They have cheaper plans but limit the number of DVDs you can take out.

Netflix was revolutionary because they shipped very eagerly and they charge $15/mo for 2 DVDs unlimited. And I think their shipping took 2 days. They shipped as soon as you shipped yours back so if you were diligent you could prob have close to a movie every night. Incredible service.

I guess the economics just isn't there.

> A young adult can totally abstain from AI and be negatively affected by all of that. And those are the kinds of things that could make people angry at the technology.

How would a young be negatively affected by abstinence from AI? Why is this implied? Give me a probable explanation for this. The article does not, and neither do any comments here.

Is the contention here that there is more censorship on X compared to Twitter pre acquisition? Is X more heavily censored than Facebook or TikTok

They go on to say they're still on Facebook and TikTok and explain:

> The people who need us most are often the ones most embedded in the walled gardens of the mainstream platforms and subjected to their corporate surveillance.

None of this is unique to Facebook and TikTok and not for X.

> Young people, people of color, queer folks, activists, and organizers use Instagram, TikTok, and Facebook every day

I'm pretty sure all these demographics use X as well.

It's just so bizarre. If you want to reach people, esp people that maybe come from a different perspective from you, why would you opt out of the best way to get your message across?

> Many respondents did acknowledge that A.I. might make them more efficient in school and the workplace, he said. But they were concerned about how the technology would affect their creativity and critical thinking skills.

So it's hurting their creativity and critical thinking skills. I wonder if they the existence of cars are hurting their ability to stay in shape.

Revealed preferences from here:

> In the study, about half of young people reported using A.I. on either a daily or weekly basis, similar to the previous year. Just under 20 percent said they did not use A.I.

The rest of the article is mostly anecdotes or vague notions about social skills.

Why don't you contribute to the conversation instead of just telling me I don't understand the issue

These types of surveys are pretty much useless. Just go by people's revealed preferences. They're using the technology. They don't have to. I'm sure most teachers and schools would prefer them not to.

Why do they have to use it? Have standards gotten higher in schools such that they will be left behind if they don't? Is there peer pressure to use it? Is there some social aspect I'm unaware of?

Of course not. People find the technology useful. Social media I understand as it's harder to break away because friends use it to communicate. But that's not true for AI.

And then they have some doomer media telling them they should be concerned and scapegoat the technology. Gen AI will prevent you from being an artist or poet?

Yeah, I just don't buy it.

Wild stuff

Note that this is shootings, so excludes murders by non guns. Rifles are not any more effective at murder than handguns. It's much easier to control, conceal, reload and attain a handgun. They're the preferred weapon of choice for practical reasons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting

Handguns: ~45–50%

Firearm (type unknown): ~20–25%

Rifles: ~2–3%

Shotguns: ~1–2%

Knives / cutting instruments: ~10–12%

Blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc.): ~3–5%

Hands, fists, feet (“personal weapons”): ~3–5%

Other (poison, fire, etc.): low single digits

https://www.criminalattorneycolumbus.com/which-weapons-are-m...

That article has some real "The best thing about school shootings is we get to have literally every article on our website be this clever headline we wrote 10 years" energy to it.

I would love headlines like:

> Illegal Immigrant Finally Caught After 20 Years of Successfully Contributing to Society

but instead you get non joke headlines like:

> ICE Agents Hurl Pregnant Immigrant Over Mexican Border To Prevent Birth On U.S. Soil

It's just cringe.

For instance, their famous 'No Way to Prevent This,' Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens article they post all over their page whenever there is some high profile gun related crime. It's all over their page and no doubt they get a bump in traffic from smug people who feel it's clever. It's just so exhausting. It was a great headline, but by the time the joke gets its own Wikipedia, it might be time to retire it. You can have a message and point of view, but don't put activism over comedy.

Look at their trending article: Critics Outraged By Flippant School Shooting Plotline In ‘The Super Mario Galaxy Movie’. Where's the joke? There is obviously no school shooting plotline. It's not clever or creative. I guess the joke is school shootings are a thing, and Mario is a popular movie?

It's basically South Parks criticism of Family Guy where they write jokes by having a seal put together random words from popular culture. School shootings + Mario = funny. And this stuff gets clicks because people think they're clever or subversive when it's just lazy and unoriginal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/'No_Way_to_Prevent_This%2C'_Sa...

https://theonion.com/critics-outraged-by-flippant-school-sho...

In a 1976 interview, Sanders said, “I favor the public ownership of utilities, banks and major industries,” and when told that sounded like socialism, he replied, “Of course.”

“public ownership of the major means of production and their conversion into worker-controlled enterprises.”

More recently, Sanders has also been described as backing worker ownership plans, with reporting that he was encouraging workers to take control of the means of production.

https://reason.com/2019/03/14/bernie-sanders-wanted-public-o...

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/14/politics/kfile-bernie-nationa...

https://www.peoplesworld.org/article/bernie-sanders-workers-...