I’m not a lawyer, but I believe that if the Lemmy instance’s ToS indicates where disputes will be resolved, and either the site owner resides there or is an LLC that is registered there, that you could sue Meta in that location.
Meta is big enough that they are most likely conducting business there (even if digitally) and you could also show that the harm suffered was suffered there.
By chance did you make her unintentional malapropism a canon part of the history of the company’s name? Like Google’s backstory (it may be an urban legend, but I heard they’d intended to name it “googol” but didn’t know how to spell the word, and misspelled it as “Google” when submitting their application).
Strange, I suddenly want to have an Italian-inspired, high class restaurant in my game called “Bone Apple Tea”
I still wouldn’t call a car an “investment” or anything, but 100% agreed. The whole “cars lose 50% of their value when you drive off the lot” thing might have been true before the Cash for Clunkers program, but it isn’t anymore. Or maybe it’s true if you’re trying to trade-in the vehicle.
If I wanted to buy the (fairly popular) car I’ve been driving for over 6 years with the same mileage, it’d cost me over 2/3rds what it cost new When I bought it, new cars were less expensive than used cars (i.e., like less than two years old with less than 25k miles) thanks to how much better the interest rates were on the loans. A couple years later, I was getting offers for more than I paid for it. And none of that is a unique experience.
its share value has still risen 27% over the last 12 months
Claiming that GTA is responsible for mass shootings is an example of what pro-gun activists do in order to deflect the blame off of guns.
If the instance or community guidelines state “X isn’t allowed,” then it isn’t censorship to remove X. It becomes censorship when mods start removing things for reasons other than enforcing instance or community guidelines. Until that point, it’s just content moderation.
If the c/Androids community guidelines state that “This community is about human-like robots. Posts regarding the phone OS are unwelcome” and a mod removes such a post, that isn’t censorship. Likewise for spam, or reposts, or any number of other things.
On the other hand if the mods remove a post about a human-like robot built in China because they’re sinophobic, that is censorship. Likewise if the human-like robot was built by Tesla, if the lead engineer were a woman, or anything along those lines. Likewise if the post were instead critical of such a robot - still censorship (unless it’s a news only community and the post was free text or a meme).
Likewise if a community’s guidelines state that controversial statements without reputable sources backing them up, statements known to be false, or statements that have been flagged as false by a fact checker are prohibited, then removing such statements isn’t censorship. It’s moderation.
You don’t have a moral or ethical obligation to respect their terms, but I wouldn’t go too wild with it, as using a ton of data might get noticed and fixed, causing someone else who’s benefiting from this and who can’t afford a replacement setup to lose it.
"I think we should have, like, the same concept of privacy for your conversations with AI
Step 1: Don’t use ChatGPT or other cloud AI services
Step 2: Use AI locally within FOSS applications, or not at all
In fact, Redot has had 13 releases since the project started late last year.
With an absolutely massive number of commits since then.
An absolutely massive number of commits that were originally made to Godot, sure. Redot has 118 more commits than Godot as of the time of this writing (76,344 vs 76,266). That’s not even 1 original commit per day.
Summary of my comment: the study showed that the AI tool in question was an effective tool for the task, nothing more.
I didn’t read this particular article, but I recently read a different one about the same study. I also clicked into the study itself and read the abstract and everything else that was freely available. The study was paywalled, but as far as I could tell:
This outcome is expected if given a tool that simplifies a process and then losing access to it. If I were writing code in Notepad and using _v2, _v3, etc for versioning, was then given an IDE and git for three months, then had to go back to my old ways with Notepad, I’d expect to be less effective than I had been. I’ve been relying on syntax highlighting, so I’m going to be paying less attention to the specific monochrome text than I used to. I’ll have fallen out of practice from using the version naming techniques that I used to use. All of the stuff that I did to make up for having worse tooling, I’m out of practice with.
But that doesn’t mean that I should use worse tools.