More like they just learned about politics from some very biased sources.

Or better yet, contribute to something that opposes mainstream social media. If you have development skills, help build something viable. If you don’t, encourage others to use something viable.

That’s not a point in either’s favor. That’s a moral wash.

Ok, you’re either trolling or been fed a lot of misinformation. The problem is about recency and extensiveness, and China is worse on both.

Not clicking that link, but the mere fact of having an account there means you don’t care about your privacy IMO.

You just need to be careful of which part of gov you give the finger to, and where you are when you give it.

Snowden did it the right way, he gave the middle finger on foreign soil and made it to an enemy of the state’s soil before the gov caught up.

It goes both ways, users are giving the middle finger to the US gov, the US gov is giving the middle finger to the Chinese gov. Lots of middle fingers flying around.

To be fair, the law is broad enough that it could target these other services as well pretty easily.

Both can be true. I’m against banning TikTok, but I also think TikTok is absolutely terrible and nobody should use it. China is authoritarian, and this ban by the US is wrong. I say this as an American.

Yup, I occasionally read their articles. It’s nowhere near where it was before Google ate its lunch, but it’s not Google, so I give them some views from time to time.

I don’t think anyone is blaming him for making the deal, they’re just mad that the deal exists.

If I got that payout, I’d be able to retire…

In this hypothetical, why would we create new languages? What benefit does that have for AI-gen code?

So either we’re going to improve AI-gen to the point where we rely on it, or human devs are still important in which case new languages matter. The main exception here are languages specifically designed for AI, in which case error-rate would go down.

So either AI pushes out broken code and human devs are still important, or AI doesn’t push out broken code and new languages aren’t valuable.

I prefer watching Mexican football announcers, and it would be nice to know what they’re saying. Though that might actually detract from the experience.

Same. If I can retire before my job is irrelevant, I’ll work on my own projects on my own terms. If I don’t, at least I have a nice pile of assets and can coast with another job.

That said, I don’t think people like you and I will have problems, because we’ll adapt. It’s the “programming is just a job” crowd that would have a lot of issues.

Don’t forget testing the code to make sure what is delivered actually matches what the customer wants.

I am a programmer, and I also wouldn’t stand for that either. We also introduce bugs and are probably around that 95% rate, but at least we know the most important uses are correct and the person who introduced them can usually fix them quickly. With AI, there’s no guarantee where the bugs will occur.

back

When did it ever not push out broken code?

Nice! Some good news at last.

It’s because of the power imbalance. If a private entity decides LGBT content is inappropriate for kids, you can find something on the fringe because someone will fill that gap. If a government makes the same decision, they can prosecute any service that doesn’t follow the law, which chills smaller services from offering it.

On the flipside, if a large tech company does it, it affects nearly everyone on the planet, whereas if a government does it, it should only impact people in that country. However, with larger countries, impacts often bleed into other countries (e.g. I see EU cookie banners in the US).

Likewise, it’s less likely for a government to rescind a bad law, whereas a bad policy can be easily reversed if it hurts profits.

We live in a society with prisons that currently house millions of people who shouldn’t be there.

Preach!

Not sure I agree with your next statement which smacks of genocide, but I guess I’d need to see your definition first (with specific examples). That’ll likely get both of us on a list, so perhaps leave it at that.

Barrack Obama did nothing to prevent fascism

In fact, he arguably made things worse. But the man has some good quotes, even if he didn’t seem to live them.

I also just honestly love that you defended

I’ll defend good arguments, regardless of the source or original intent. I’m not here to win an argument, I’m here to discuss ideas, and ideas don’t take sides.

Saying that you’re not a progressive is as good as saying you don’t really care if Nazis take over again.

Non-sequitur much?

You also ignored 90% of what I had to say about Hitler.

My post was long enough, so I cut some corners. I don’t really see the point in rehashing the pre-WW2 German political and social situation.

Do you believe that Hitler just came along to find a Germany that was already

I think he succeeded because Germany was already primed for it. The people were destitute, desperate, and felt wronged, and Hitler channeled and focused that into a single, tangible enemy.

Socialists use “capitalists,” US conservatives use “woke,” and progressives use “hate speech,” though none seem nearly as effective as Hitler’s marketing, unless conditions are right. Lenin and Stalin succeeded because everyone hated the Tsar, but Trump succeeded because Democrats completely dropped the ball despite largely missing why people were pissed (and it’s not because of LGBT folk, it’s because stuff is expensive). The options in 2024 were more of the same or Trump’s promise to grow our way out. The former was probably the better deal, but the latter sounds better on paper.

Hitler won because he tapped into a common frustration (poverty and anger at reparations), and was able to redirect it at a latent concern that he could alleviate. People like simple solutions like “it’s their fault, if we take them out, our problems will be fixed.” Look at the messaging here on Lemmy, “eat the rich,” “Luigi was right,” etc. It’s the same kind of redirection Hitler and Lenin used to get power.

Trump kind of had that in 2016 with “drain the swamp” (people hate corrupt politicians), but he failed to deliver. He didn’t seem to find that same mark this time, but Harris fumbled so hard (said she wouldn’t have changed anything about Biden’s term) that he was able to win. People here like to blame Twitter/X, but I really don’t think that was a significant contributor.