FaceDeer, don't act dumb. You clearly went into both threads to attack and name-call anybody who doesn't criticize AI under your ill-defined, ever-shifting standards. So your attacks ended up contradictory and hypocritical.
And now you're here to defend Mozilla waste by suggesting there are people who totally wanted it. (Are they in the room with you right now?)
Facedeer, posting two contradictory things is not "having an opinon." It is trolling.
You should try having an opinion, and even sticking to the topic (addressing Mozilla's waste instead of bloviating about some vague virtue of the right to speech ). It would be so much more interesting.
Facedeer, if you don't want people to see you as a troll, don't complain about "apocalyptic" rhetoric around AI job loss one day, then say people are in "denial" if they don't believe it the next day.
In other words, don't be a troll.
FauxLiving, being another AI advocate who's just here to troll and spread snark doesn't make you special.
Nor does pretending you have a special opinion while not only failing to provide it, but instead attacking people who disagree with you. But with flair. Here's a tip: address what's discussed, instead of bloviating about diversity of thought or making baseless accusations towards people who disagree with you.
Supposedly, this is a new and different team that will be taking a grant from the Mozilla Foundation. (I have no idea where these new resources came from, but in the best case scenario, they will appear out of thin air and not slow down work on Thunderbird...)
I see your account is just here to troll/harass people who don't love AI too, but we're witnessing Mozilla burning goodwill and capital for no apparent reason.
Please don't tell people to stick their heads in the sand.
Advocacy against Mozilla's waste has already gotten them nervous and defensive, and that advocacy can and should continue.
If anybody needs to know: this is why you should not not donate to the Mozilla Foundation. No money goes towards Firefox or Thunderbird through it!
The products I care about:
The groups I don't:
This is the innovation that deserves VC funding
Unsurprisingly, centralizing your data between the private and public sector means everything is vulnerable at a centralized location.
The exposed materials include files labeled 'secret' in Chinese
In Chinese?!
tl;dr this new policy is dumb and bad. References to specific things like Antifa make no logical sense as a grounds for censorship, because there were already reasonable rules in place to handle actual problems.
In some cases, the content that Meta considers a threat signal is commonsensical. If, for instance, a user mentions bringing a weapon to an event, the company flags it as a threat signal. But in other cases, Meta’s process for identifying threat signals is more vague. Under the new rules, Meta might trigger a threat signal when a user posts a “visual depiction of a weapon,” a “reference to arson, theft, or vandalism,” or “military language,” if accompanied by the word “antifa.”
If “antifa” is mentioned in the context of “references to historical or recent incidents of violence” — a category so sprawling that it includes “historic wars” and “battles” — that post will also be penalized. Should Meta apply this rule as written, the company could, for instance, restrict posts comparing the antifascist nature of World War II to the contemporary antifa movement.
It's difficult to believe any intellectual discussion would happen on Facebook, but this rule further cements the suppression of it.
You ignored the first half of my statement. Noted.
To the second half: show me where they asked Mozilla to spend money on it before Mozilla did. Otherwise you misinterpreted what I wrote.