You’re right that it might not make sense to worry about being killed in particular, but the person you responded to described a series of genuinely scary situations, and it isn’t irrational to be fearful for your safety in those moments. But then you had to go and say,

Given that you indeed shoved those goalposts a large distance from what I was saying in the rest of your comment, and that I see from your comment history that you believe in the “patriarchy” conspiracy theory, it’s clear to me it would serve no purpose to seriously discuss anything on this topic with you.

and oooooh, you really lost me there, not gonna lie. I’m curious of your understanding of “the patriarchy” is different than mine, but surely you recognize that we live in a male-dominated society, no?

Sure, as soon as you stop hating on e-bikes

E-bikes can replace cars in far more situations than regular bicycles can.

I have a Class 3 (28mph), it’s actually not too bad. That assumes the brakes are well-maintained, though, and as we know there are no inspections for e-bikes. I’ve seen some terrifyingly bad brakes on normal bicycles, so I can’t imagine what some people’s e-bikes look like.

It should be mandatory for Class 2 and Class 3 e-bikes to have hydraulic disc brakes imo. I have mechanical disc brakes, and I have to tighten them at least once a month. It seems unwise to trust that the average person would also do that. Rim brakes are right out; they have nowhere near enough braking power for the speed and weight of most e-bikes.

Oh, they get way faster than that haha

-Guy who has no interest in seeing cars largely replaced with bikes in cities

It’s relatively common for a car to merge into you where I live. If you’re adjacent to the front wheel it’s safer to accelerate the rest of the way than it is to brake.

Edit: it’s also insane that they’re trying to do this with e-bikes before cars.

Since you’re still free to accelerate by pedaling like a normal bike user, that significantly reduces the amount of situations where the pedal assist would actually save you.

Bro e-bikes are like 3-6x heavier than normal bikes, manual pedaling sucks and you can’t accelerate for shit

Of course the Lemmy devs aren’t liable for GDPR violations; the admins are. That doesn’t eliminate the problem, though: if the Lemmy devs wish to see their software used as it is now in the long term, they need to introduce GDPR compliance tools. We should consider it gravely concerning that bad actors (e.g., a Reddit employee) can set up Lemmy admins for a massive GDPR suit at any moment.

Edit:

if the people complaining are so concerned, why do they not contribute the code to fix their perceived issues?

I know it’s a stereotype around here, but not everybody on Lemmy is a programmer with free time.

You may well get one in your lifetime. CVD technology is becoming increasingly practical, and future improvements in computing may depend on it.

I’ve used Java 21 pretty extensively, and it’s still comically bad compared to various alternatives, even apples-to-apples alternatives like C#. The only reason to use Java is that you’ve already been using Java.

Tree is undercooked. Also, please bump the resolution and/or compression quality, the JPEG tiles are massive.

I think this is from an open-source model, possibly running locally. I doubt it has a robust post-generation censor. This output is probably a result of RLHF, which is even more precarious than an output censor.

You are mistaken that the discrepancy is the result of algorithmic bias. The latter image depicts a custom, hard-coded result that appears when one of preselected set of queries are searched. It was added as part of an anti-domestic violence drive. The trouble is, adding a copy of the selected queries with substituted gendered language (e.g., substituting “husband” with “wife”, “man” with “woman”, etc.) would have taken all of 10 minutes. It’s not surprising that most are unsympathetic to this excuse.

It isn’t though? The post is advocating that everyone should receive help, while the comment is trying to justify the way it currently is.

You should reconsider that, because you are most definitely giving up many of your rights to your content.

I’m not an authority on copyright, nor did I claim to be. I’m just aware of my surroundings.

And again, even if courts suddenly decide that training AI isn’t fair use, you don’t have to attach a license to your comments for it to apply. Content that you produce is copyrighted by default, with all rights reserved. You are exclusively giving away rights by attaching a CC license, not reserving them.

So you’re hoping judges will collectively reinterpret the definition of fair use under copyright law to exclude the training of AI models? Good luck with that lol

Also, most of your comments wouldn’t be considered copyrightable.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0!

Why? You realize that you reserve more rights by not including a license than by including one, right?

Printing “this shit is milk” on a bottle is dirt cheap. It’s practically free. They probably already do it with the expiration date.

Problem is, some bright-eyed fuckfuck at PepsiCo realized they could sell more shit using labels with no visible dot matrix and a color palette with vomit-inducing vibrancy and 69 million shades. Approximately 90 seconds later, everyone else decided that they need to wrap their plastic in some plastic to “stay competitive”. The industry collectively stuffed some lunch money in Ronald H. W. Gore’s titty pocket, and here we are, decades later, with a mountain of unrecyclable garbage that no one even knew couldn’t be recycled. And it’s not even their fault, for the same exact reason we don’t expect people to know not to lick the lead paint off their mid-20th century coffee mugs.