> I have firsthand experience being diagnosed and prescribed medication for ADHD within about half an hour of self-reporting mild symptoms with a physician remotely
That's awfully convenient isn't it. The 38% of Stanford students claiming to be disabled must have a good reason for it while those of us who understand how easy it is to be diagnosed with a so-called "disability" must be lying. Do you honestly believe that roughly half of the people you meet need special accommodations to study and work?
Yes, because half the people I know do need special accommodations. Maybe if you didn't go out of your way to avoid disabled people you'd notice us when we exist.
Stats that people want shitty robots to do these things.
When it comes to driving, the people I know are either content to take public transit (or would be, if their locales had any) or -- get this -- they drive because THEY LIKE DRIVING. Are you one of those people who uses ChatGPT to read, write, and listen to your podcasts for you?
I think they kind of are if you want swipe features? Are there any FLOSS apps besides FUTO that have that?
For what it's worth, I don't require that the friends of the author of my keyboard software share my political values. We live in a morally compromised world and I use software every day written by organizations doing evil.
First, FUTO doesn't produce FLOSS.
The key difference though, is that Google and Microsoft are doing evil for the end goal of more money whereas FUTO appears to be using all money and influence specifically in service of fascism. Can I pick a phone made with 100% ethical hardware and software? No, probably not. Can I avoid a brand actively trying to make everything for its own sake? Absolutely.
> whereas FUTO appears to be using all money and influence specifically in service of fascism
This seems like a wild mischaracterization of donating money to free software projects? https://futo.org/grants/ but maybe I don't have the same ideological commitments that you do.
This response is not indicative of thorough reading of what was shared thus far. I really do not think you could have read the article listed above and think the "grants" are new information.
> Your content isn't just for human readers. Machines use it too. Your content gets indexed by search engines, and parsed by LLMs, and those things parse the well-formed HTML your systems publish.
> While the exact nature of the FBI investigation hasn’t been confirmed, it is speculated it can be related to copyright or CSAM (child sexual abuse material) dissemination issues. Altogether, the situation suggests growing pressure on whoever runs Archive.is, and on intermediaries that help make its service accessible.
Oh, so a chatbot wrote this article. Glad it tipped its hand early enough I didn't waste that much time.
Because I can get content I want there, and with a summarisatin option, it is irrelevant to me if they don't "respect my time" because it doesn't take any more time for me to get at the actual recipe.
That image caption says "A white walker in a desolate field reading Wikipedia", but the (backwards for some reason) Wikipedia article says "White Waleers". Forgive me for thinking this person might not have the necessary braincells to commentate on legal issues.
What differences of opinion would those be? Feel free to elaborate.
Editing to elaborate: If dhh is allowed to have the opinion that (1) you can tell who's a "native Brit" just by looking at them, (2) there are fewer "native Brits" in London these days, and (3) this is a bad thing, then other people are allowed tr have the opinion that dhh is a racist, and by your own logic you can't deride these people for having a different opinion to you.
Can confirm; I was your physician.
(Anyone can say anything online!)
reply