You can if the company is a non-profit like open AI. Basically when you take on investments for a company you declare what the goal/purpose of a company is, either to make money (for profit) or for some other nebulous cause (non-profit) eg. Ending hunger or saving humanity from AI. If an investor thinks you aren’t following that goal and are pursuing some other goal then they can sue the company.

Sadly most companies are for profit so they can only be sued if they’re trying to do something that doesn’t optimally make money. So a fossil fuel company can’t be sued for legally dumping poison into the air if it’s the most cost efficient method, but they can be sued if they do a less cost efficient solution that would make air quality better because improving people’s health isnt there goal, making money is.

It wouldn’t be too hard if you take it from the starting point of you need to prove that you need it, and that could basically just be answering the following questions

• do you need it for your job, is it on this list of jobs that require a large vehicle?
• do you have a disability that requires a large car?

Maybe add in another exception for large families but station wagons filled that niche fine before SUVs came in. Either way these are very discrete and definable definitions.

We even already have the framework set up, semi trucks require different licensing and registration so that some random person can’t just buy a vehicle that can easily kill a ton of people accidentally. The way trucks are headed that argument continues to get more applicable.

You aren’t gonna get one with union labor in the u.s. and even if it was made by non union labor either the workers would be horribly underpaid and/or the quality would be lower.

It’s not right to compare prices between countries with vastly different price levels. Are u.s. farmers doing the country a disservice by not selling pork for $0.50 a pound? No we accept that we make more and that we should pay our fellow Americans more so they can have the same quality of life we do. Ideally this solidarity should extend internationally but we should at least preserve it in the U.S.

China needs a $10,000 vehicle because that’s all there middle class making $20,000 can afford. The u.s. doesn’t, plenty of middle class Americans are buying new $30,000 cars, they just aren’t buying electric ones, they’re getting huge SUVs and pickup trucks. What the u.s. needs is to disincentivize or even ban people from buying large gas cars that don’t need them.

Eventually if everyone’s forced to get evs the used stock will turn into evs too and you’ll get your $10,000 ev without destroying the American auto industry and millions of good paying union jobs.

You can disagree with Maduro and his autocratic actions without supporting sanctions that mostly harm the civilian population.

We really need to vote her out this round, San Francisco deserves better than this

the primary motivation behind this decision was. Obviously it wasn’t building public housing

That doesn’t mean the intent behind the CCP policy isn’t good, well intentioned, or positive

Can you see how I’m confused, do you think the primary intent is for public housing, or for some political drama?

It could be some political drama, we’ll never know what goes on in the HK city council, but if you read the article you’ll see this site wasn’t selected so much as it’s lease was up and the city would be taking back control of it and they needed to do something with it. Yeah some high official could’ve been waiting for the course to come back into city hands so they could build public housing over it and snub a rival, but I think it’s far more likely that the property fell into the cities hands and they decided to turn it into affordable housing because that’s what the city needs, no sinister or alterior motive is needed.

the CCP can’t possibly do something in the interests of the people, their must be something dastardly behind this.

Your just as bad as the tankies who think u.s. aid is just a CIA front, or the Republicans who think welfare is just Democrats keeping black people poor and dependent.

The u.s government and CCP aren’t just full of villains trying to oppress people, both have the capacity for empathy and compassion and do exercise it often.

degeneration might be the ONLY way to prevent Faceboom

So we should just start posting furry porn to try and scare them off?

Screw ball golf, disc golf though solves all it’s problems

1. Can play in almost any environment so no habitat destruction needed. Might have to clear a few trees or brush in dense forest but otherwise mostly keeps forests intact

2. No elitism or arrogance. It’s one of the cheapest sports there is, just requires a couple $15 discs and most courses are free and are part of parks. Not much maintenance is needed on the course.

3. Easier to pick up. Most people can at least throw a disc 10 yards or so after a couple tries. Also more forgiving if drunk or high in that way.

4. More interesting to watch /play. Courses usually have obstacles like trees and the flight path of discs has a lot of lateral movement so if your good/lucky you can weave it through the obstacles.

Some drugs (alcohol, opiates, meth) do fuck up your brain with long term consistent use associated with addiction, but most people don’t fall into that unless they have some sort of severe external stress or genetic predisposition. You can see this with alcohol which despite its acceptance by society is one of the most harmful drugs out there, but most people who consume it do so in relative moderation.

Drug prohibition fucks ups society way more than drugs can fuck up your brain. It creates a police state that targets the poor and minorities. It gives money to cartels and gangs that cause violence. It doesn’t even stop drug use, those who want it can still get it, it just makes drugs less safe as theirs no quality control leading to adulterants and an incentive to make overly concentrated substances like fentanyl, which probably wouldn’t exist without prohibition.

then they’ll find some sort of technical excuse and pull the plug on ActivityPub support

How do they do this without running a foul of regulators? People are already mad at meta and want to break them up for having instagram and Facebook, if they add the last big social media platform every politician right and left will be lining up to take them down. There’s a reason they never bought twitter despite being able to 10x over. Combine that with new EU interoperability laws and there’s no way meta could get away with that.

1. Ban cars
2. Legalize drugs
3. Basic income for unhoused and impoverished funded by said drug taxes

The platform never really took off. It was a niche messaging platform before Facebook and Google and went back to being one after they left. I have yet to see any evidence that Google or Facebook helped or hurt xmpp, just speculation and anger that it didn’t take off.

To all the people wondering about metas intentions in this it’s not the big bad corporation taking down the upstart competition. All the people saying it’s EEE can’t show any sign metas doing this or even wants to because the strategy doesn’t work, any time a company does it it either doesn’t take off or they get brought up on anti-trust laws. Show me a standard that was destroyed by EEE and I’ll show you a standard that never took off in the first place. All the usual examples given, email, java, html, remain open standards to this day.

The truth is the fediverse isn’t competition to meta, it’s a fraction of the size and is populated by users who would never use meta services in the first place. They can pretend it’s a competitor though. If twitter does actually collapse and people switch to threads meta will face anti-trust suits for owning the three largest social media platforms. If they add activity pub support though they can point to the fediverse and say it’s competition, even if it’s only 1 % of the platform. They also have to deal with EU interoperability laws that might start getting enforced.

TL;DR this is about compliance for meta, not conquest.

Western nations give into terrorist demands going back to the French revolution. Some of those demands were for the freedom of speech that is being trampled on here or other rights and protections we hold dear. For recent examples look at the troubles or even that guy who shot shinzo abe and got the moonies out of Japan.

The focus shouldn’t just be on the means for political change, though the means can be criticized, but the political change itself. Banning book burnings in this case is an afront to free speech and should not be implemented.

There are 2 problems with not having enough diversity in training data:

1. The AI will be worse at depicting diversity when prompted, eg. If the AI hasn’t seen enough pictures of black people it may not be able to depict black hair properly as it doesn’t “know what it looks like”

2. The AI will not show as much diversity when not prompted. The AI is working off statistics so if you tell it to depict a person and most of the people it’s “seen” are white men it will almost always depict a white man because that’s statistically what a person is according to its data.

This method combats the second problem, but not the first. The first can mostly be solved by generally scaling the training data though, which is mostly what these companies have been doing. Even if only 1% of your images are of POC, if you have 1b images 10mil will be of POC which may be enough to train it. The second problem would remain unsolved though since the AI will always go with the statistically safe 99%.

It does, it just favors the dominant ethno-religous complex. Much of the western proffesional dress code has basis in christian ideals of modesty. These cultural signifiers don’t occur to us though as they’re so normalized. If you came to work dressed like Angela from the office you wouldn’t be cited because the dress code was written with that attire in mind and people view it as normal. You’ll be cited if you violate those ideas of modesty, eg. Showing midriff, or having different views on modesty, eg. A head scarf.

If you want to say it’s completely neutral you’ll have to exorcise all christian biases and assumptions from western culture, which they dont seem to be doing here.

Looks like somewhere close to chabot park near Oakland California. It’s overlooking the bay and across to San Francisco. You can see two dogs fucking, then southern Oakland, then the thin strip of water separating Alameda island, then the larger bay, than the southern part of San Francisco.

Those are mostly for sprinters and short distance runners as they are higher impact and use running cleats with less cushion then softer distance running shoes. They’re also more likely to fall in events like hurdles and it’s better to land on that then on concrete. Most of the shock that could be absorbed by those tracks could also be absorbed by good running shoes. Most events above a mile take place on the streets.

The sticking point for diplomacy is not the annexed lands but the right to return. Arafat would’ve accepted most of the border changes, except the ones in east Jerusalem, and maybe even Hamas would. But Israel will not accept a deal with the right to return, as it would change the demographics so much as to make Jewish democracy nearly impossible. Palestinians won’t accept a deal without it as so many are still cramped in refugee camps looking to return. Combine that with the fact that Israel has almost all the power and therefore no reason to negotiate and the idea of a diplomatic solution without heavy outside pressure is impossible