Great, now take the same freedom fighter bots and tell them to argue IP policy on social media online. We can hear all about the right minded ways to think about intellectual property and how all the comments around here are misinformation.

It’s like people lose their minds when you throw an enemy into the sentence. I don’t think these people crafting propaganda bots are heroes, even if they are on “my” team. Go down this road, and you can throw away forums like Lemmy, it’ll just be bots arguing with bots.

Honestly, if you look at it in a vacuum, this looks pretty similar to what the other side is doing.

It’s a bot that draws from its own side’s narratives and pushes that line.

Take away Russia from the picture and think about how often our media pushes a spin on other subjects that isn’t exactly the truth.

Doesn’t look so much like “social media propaganda bots versus AI-driven bots arguing back” as much as propaganda bots on both sides spewing whatever their masters want us to see.

What poor quality journalism writing.

How can you have a headline like that without addressing what makes the contents of the program unusual and what makes the program controversial?

There’s a better translation right here in this thread. “Hurting our relationship” is not so literal and so doesn’t sound daft in English.

It feels shady the way the media uses this overly literal translation of ‘hurt the feelings’ all the time in order to make the Chinese sound ridiculous. Could make any foreign language speaker sound ridiculous by cherry picking funny but common phrases and translating them literally.

Your phone keyboard statistical engine is not a very insightful comparison to the neural networks that power LLMs. They’re not the same technology at all and just share the barest minimum superficial similarities.

I hate the cynical nihilism around here so much. It plays into the Republican and big business hands so well it might as well be propaganda.

We had net neutrality before under the Democrats. The Republicans got rid of it when they took power.

Bothsidesism is juvenile bullshit.

Wouldn’t this justify vandalizing any type of machine whatsoever? Get in an elevator and nobody is looking? Stab the control panel so they have to get a human in the future making the elevator. See a car and no one is looking? Set it on fire so they have to use a human pulled rickshaw instead.

Wow that seems like a strange permission to have as default. It doesn’t seem like very many apps have a legitimate need for listing other installed apps unless I’m missing something.

How are they managing to do this? Surely it requires a permission in Android to access the list of installed apps, right?

I recall Dorsey publicly coming out in support of Elon’s Twitter well after the sale. Maybe there was no ethical conflict for Dorsey and he likes what he sees.

Yeah, maybe all of this wouldn’t have happened if the equity was split among the employees.

This is an astonishingly well written, nuanced, and level headed response. Really on a level I’m not used to seeing on this platform.

I don’t think waving away being a Luddite just by saying so makes it so.

I can’t think of a single angle of principled moral theory that makes this okay. Vandalizing or stealing someone else’s property they paid for. Hurting both the restaurant and the customer by depriving them of their food. Holding back progress on an invention that can reduce the need for humans to engage in a type of work that is hard, dangerous at times, and low paid.

From a purely rational on paper view, it doesn’t look terribly different than saying vandalizing or stealing from delivery vehicles driven by people isn’t wrong. What possible justification could there be for this view besides Ludditism fuck robots?

Again, just anti consumer bullshit spearheaded by Apple and gargled by Samsung.

Samsung was actually one of the later Android manufacturers to drop it is my recollection.

I used to do this. I thought it was awesome but I was literally the only person I ever knew who did this. It was not a popular thing to do.

It always blows my mind some people actually found Apple’s defense convincing.

The iPhones didn’t inform users when they were throttling because they had an old battery. Apple kept the throttling a secret and coincidentally it helped them upsell new phones to people with old phones. This type of functionality was also unique to Apple, it’s not like this is the only choice they had and an industry practice.

Data is one of those things that you don’t know how it’s going to be used against you until it is. If somebody is going to have that data, I’d rather my own government have that data vs a foreign government… Harming one’s own citizens isn’t a great strategy to get your way, but harming another’s citizens is quite effective.

I don’t know what government actions you’ve been watching, if all of modern history is a guide, it’s a lot easier to make a profit by harming your own citizens rather than harming another country’s citizens.

From where I’ve been sitting, the normal pattern is a country’s rich and powerful exploit the commoners of their own country for profit and power. It’s much harder to gain from exploiting another country’s citizens, i.e. you can’t directly tax them, you can’t take away their things, you can’t sell their rights to your powerful friends, etc.

Thing is, neither the US nor Chinese company doing a home break-in is a realistic concern.

Realistic concerns are more along the lines of them sharing data that could rightly or wrongly get you on the radar of US law enforcement, or get you discriminated against in some way.

In terms of realistic concerns, your data being in US rather than foreign hands seems like significantly more of a problem.

In a way, it looks even worse for a company that it was ahead in the fundamental research, and the corporate bureaucracy and management held it back so much that competitors took the difficult ideas invented there and turned them into products first. My intuition is that it’s easier to fix being behind on a research and technology level than it is to fix having bad corporate culture and complacent management focused only on protecting existing cash cows.