Fair points but as someone who works in cybersecurity. Phishing emails can happen without admin access. I haven’t heard of any randsomware that is triggered by just clicking on a link.

I think there should be some restrictions but highly technical people should slowly be given more and more control as they gain more trust/experience.

Good point, them leaving says I don’t want to be involved not that I want to stop the injustice.

I thought my comment was pretty clear that some rules are justified and that the IT person can just be the bearer of bad news.

Maybe not, hopefully this comment clarifies.

In my experience it’s been IT people telling me you can’t use a certain tool or have more control over your computer cause of their rules.

The expression is appropriate but the meme assumes that im doubting the IT person’s expertise. I’m not, I’m just not liking the rules that get in the way of my work. Some rules do make sense though.

Edit: just wanted to point out, yes I agree, you need the rules, they are still annoying tho.

Ooo I know:

Evolutionary speaking, it makes sense to compete within your own species when times are good, cause there is no threat to the survival of the entire group.

Conversely, when times are bad and the entire species is threatened, it’s best to cooperate as much as possible instead of compete.

Idk… frame it on BLM people?

Ooo, I know, society collapses and they think they have all the guns!

What if he is not mentally a 5 year old but people keep letting him do what he wants and he is trying to keep pushing that envelope.

Him acting like a 5 year old and getting away with it is also on society imo.

I agree but I also like to point out that the AI craze started with LLMs and those MLs have been around before OpenAI.

So if openAI never released chat GPT, it wouldn’t have become synonymous with crypto in terms of false promises.

Not only that, image analysis and statistical guesses have always been around and do not need ML to work. It’s just one more tool in the toolbox.

How could it be weaponized?

It costs money (relative to your company size) to do any legal action, a big company suing means they lose waaay more $ than the small opponent.

Same thing with the small guy, it’s not a lot of $ to sue but it’s still a big chunk of your business so you would want to avoid unless your pretty sure the law is on your side.

That’s exactly my point which I think some downvotes missed.

Digital ownership can just be a guarantee for the company to let you access it until 100 years after purchase.

Same as speeding tickets in Nordic countries, it’s a parentage of total revenue. Im sure these details can be ironed out but the idea is that a corp can’t use its unlimited resources, it has to share said resources with their opponent to ensure a fair trail, otherwise it’s not justice imo.

Sorry what I meant is to pool both parties legal budget, divide it in half and give each the same amount.

Basically disarms all corporates from using their army of lawyers because their big army will never give them an advantage. So they would actually avoid legal battles cause it would cost them money with no unfair advantage.

It’s actually true for most things if you think long term enough.

You don’t really own things, you have control over them for a portion of your life.

Would be pretty easy to argue that digital ownership is perpetual access for the rest of your life.

But then they can’t resell you the same thing on different platforms.

I don’t understand why they don’t just charge both parties the average cost when one side has waaay more legal resources than the other. Seems like such an obvious issue with the legal system that even the founding fathers should have realized if they thought for a second.

Or they did and this is the intended system.

Zionism has been a thing before bibi

I mean, I guess that makes sense, when you go nazi, might as well go full nazi.

But seriously, where the fuck is the line? Is there one?

Yeah, that sucks. I would highly support people making better decisions.

But if they are gonna be stubborn, we might as well learn what not to do for the future.

Imo that’s great. The best display of what policies make people’s life better is a stark contrast between two groups implementing opposing systems.

Cause it’s a C++ replacement when said audience never asked for one. It’s great but it’s still waaaayy too early, people need to slowly get comfortable with it.