96VXb9ktTjFnRi

I am all in favor of hating Musk and all his products, but I think you're right. It seems rather unlikely that they would instruct their LLM to go out of its way to give fascist replies. That's not to say that it shouldn't be instructed to not give fascist output, which apparently it hasn't been. Sadly, increasingly people form their view of the world based on the output of LLMs, so it would be helpful if these LLMs would help create worldviews that are beneficial to humanity at large, or at the very least prevent ones that are evidently harmfull. Which begs the question, who is to decide what is helpful and what is harmful. Musks answer is probably 'freedom of speech, who is to say that we can't spoonfeed hate to little children'. Which seems to me to be an example of when ideas of freedom turn into nihilism. But where they're right is that government should also not be the one who tells people how to view the world. It's people who should tell government, and the reverse, though perhaps well intended, is itself rather dangerous. I think the solution, as per usual, is to free it all up, make FOSS LLMs, and let people choose the limitations which they deem proper. I would certainly not want my kids on 'freedom of speech'-style unrestricted AI, just like I don't want some amoral nihilist as my kids' school teacher. I want someone who teaches them love, kindness, forgiveness, harmony, honesty, sincerity, etc.

Breaking News: Donald Trump said something!

LIES!!

Europeans traveled the globe to spread the love of God and everyone they encountered they treated with the utmost respect because they realized these people, like themselves, are God's creation, created in His image. That's the beauty about Christians throughout the ages, you can safely trust upon their moral compass because they adhere to the laws of God and God only. If Europeans weren't truly guided by God, and ever behaved in bad ways as is suggested here, you would expect to see examples of such unprovoked death and destruction across the globe all throughout the age of exploration and colonialism. But what we see, for the most part, is harmony and bliss, ever lasting peace and prosperity, like a mirror image of the Kingdom of Heaven brought to earth. And people across the globe converted because they were impressed by the moral superiority of the white man, saviors of humanity, chosen by God himself to guide us to His perfect light. And yes, of course, in some instances, when indiginous people would threaten this harmony, the good Christians needed to defend it, as warriors of God, and sometimes harsh measures needed to be taken. But to frame this genocide, ethnic cleansing, rape, torture, theft, etc. as immoral is shortsighted. They raped and tortured in self defense, or if not that, in His defence. Sometimes it may not be immediately obvious how these actions by Christians are part of Gods plan, but God and his true believers in His name, work in mysterious ways, and to question these ways, whether guided by hatred or logic, is to disrespect God, because it shows you have no faith. When you act out of faith in God, this requires no logic, no justification. The actions of the Christian man are it's own justification. Submit and all will be well. But if you resist you deserve everything that's coming to you, fire and brimstone, whether it's in Hell or here on earth, you will burn, as the abomination you are.

Say it with me, 'for the Grace of God, DEATH TO ALL NON-BELIEVERS!'

/s (obviously..)

Nor should you, no one does. And you're not alone with this question, seeing the upvotes. So it presumably helped others.

Refugees are a group of people that's very heterogenous. They don't have one common way of treating Denmark. Except for the 'asking Denmark for asylum' of course.

Denmark does treat refugees a certain way, if by Denmark we mean their government, and not Danes in general. The government has certain policies which define their treatment. Basically they're trying to win the race to the bottom: 'treating them worse than other countries do', hoping refugees will go to other countries instead. It's a shortsighted tactic because now we here in the Netherlands as well as in other countries, are joining the race to the bottom. Which means collectively we are losing our humanity, while still largely getting equal amounts of refugees at our borders. Unless of course you're willing treat people so poorly, that even a warzone is more acceptable. But what in the world are we defending if we are willing to lose all human decency over it?

It also would still allow parodies and satire, so some of the standard doctrine of fair use would still apply.

I feel like there is momentum in Europe to switch to FOSS. Europe knows that the US cannot be trusted any longer. And this cannot be undone. Europe is striving for independence. Huge amounts of money are being spent on military sovereignty right now. All of us here on Lemmy know digital sovereignty is equally important. Recently an ICC prosecutor was cut off from his MS account because the US doesn't like the Netanyahu arrest-warrant. These things don't go unnoticed. It shows that technological dependance is not innocent, it can and will be used against us.

We need to use this momentum. Get involved, mail your representatives (municipal, provincial, national, federal), get petitions running, mail newspapers, go to political party conventions and get this on the agenda. It won't fix itself. This problem is somewhat abstract and the solutions are just slightly too complicated for the general public. Most people don't know what FOSS means. If we want this to change, those who see it and understand what needs to be done, need to get in to action.

If we were to rank people on the basis of how far they are on the path towards enlightenment, without a doubt Jeff Bezos would have all the world in front of him.

Aside from the pricking scandal, what a fantastic idea.

On "Fête de la Musique" people are urged to play music outside.

Here my country is stuck with Christian holidays that noone remembers the meaning of.

The US & UK supported the 1953 coup d'état to secure their oil interest. "Economically, American firms gained considerable control over Iranian oil production, with US companies taking around 40 percent of the profits" The Islamic Revolution is a response to this. If the west wasn't as imperalist, who knows what could've become of Iran.

But to be honest, there's no way western forces will take over control in Iran. Though it's at a technological disadvantage, their military is huge, as well as their population of more than 90 million. Then there's Pakistan that has threatened to get involved if the US does. Then there's Irans proxies, though they're in a relatively weakened state for the moment. But Iran has allied millitias all across the region. Then there's China depending on the Iranian oil. I mean, if you want to force your way into World War 3 this seems like a brilliant idea.

How many apps did you ask them to download?

Personally, I only asked for this one, and everyone who is of importance to me chose to do it.

Surely this will work wonders, they'll never recover from this. Also they won't have any incentive, because why would you even consider building a bomb in such a friendly environment? Why would there need to be an axis of resistance, let them surrender unconditionally like Trump suggested, because clearly Israel and the US are to be trusted. If only these damned Iranians remained at the negotiating table while we bombed the shit out of them unprovoked. I guess they don't want peace. /s