treefrog

Did you read the article? Google is not an insurance company. So, why is my hospital sharing information with them? And why wasn't that disclosed in the privacy policy?

Those are the types of questions this study raises.

Can we just strap Jeff and Elon to a rocket and shoot them at Mars? They both seem like they're in such a hurry, I feel like we should help them.

I hear you about it just being an evolution of the propaganda machine. And I think it's going to reveal cracks in the system. That it's going to rip the bandaid off faster than climate change which is the slow peel we're all dealing with already.

Harm reduction would be investing money in government regulation. Lobbying for government regulation. Usually this is seen as a disaster for business, but in this case it would throttle competitors too. And possibly save a lot of lives. Because this sort of automated propaganda is going to create a lot of fascist regimes all over the planet. Propped up by the illusion of democracy.

More so than it already is.

I just heard a news report on OpenAI developing technology to make deep fakes easier. They realized this could cause harm. So they're only releasing it to a few educational institutions.

This is harm reduction. And I realize corporate ethics is something of an oxymoron. But something along these lines was what the original person was meaning by a harm reduction approach by microsoft. If they're aware their technology is going to cause harms to democracy, they have an ethical duty to reduce those harms. Unfortunately, corporations often put ethical duties to increase shareholder value first. That doesn't mean they don't have other ethical responsibilities too.

right, so I think the person's point was that microsoft is helping to manufacture the harm, and warning that the harm is there, but not doing much to actually reduce the harm.

No, harm reduction would be recognizing that an object as causing harm, that people will use that object anyway, and doing what we can to minimize the harms caused by that use.

It's less about addiction and brain chemistry than simple math. If harm is being caused, and it can be reduced, reduce it.

Yeah, I can't say I've ever tried recycling large items. But I've dropped boxes off at the stores here in the Midwest, and they've never hassled me over misc. electronic garbage. They used to have kiosks in the entryway. Or maybe still do at some stores.

It's free. I believe, Best Buy packages it all up and ships it to China. I believe Chinese companies pay for the waste, and then pay very poor people to pick through it for valuable (and toxic) metals. A lot of the metals etc. end up in the groundwater. In other words, it's still mostly pollution, but dropping it off at Best Buy makes it someone else's pollution...

Not sure how to feel about all of it to be honest. I still recycle at Best Buy, but it's kinda like recycling plastic in the municipal recycling, I know most of it ends up in the garbage, and thus as pollution, ultimately. But I still put it where it's 'supposed' to go.

If you have Best Buys they have e-waste recycling available year round. It doesn't really solve the problem though, it just ships it off to poorer countries.

Trader Joes too. Which is a bummer, I liked buying their veggie burgers.

Now I'm planning to stand outside their stores and picket instead. Let all those liberals know what they're spending their money on, the destruction of the working class.

A scalpel can be used to cut or to heal, depending on the skill and intentions of the wielder.

Learned that from Stanislov Grof. He was talking about LSD.

It's not really alleged when they admit in their own interoffice emails that it's happening.