

Does a good parent place restrictions on what their child can and can’t do? Yes. The thing about bad parents is that they are notoriously irresponsible. They would be the least likely to utilize such a feature.

Note that this account is meant to be specially prejudicial against instances, communities, users (even admins) who either don’t seem to be acting in good faith or if they claim to do so while being inconsistent or applying a heavy dose of favoritism.
The determination is substance based and involves whether they are condoning harassment or making unevenly applied claims and accusations, not just downvotes.
This means I’m not ignoring them, just not even seeing them


Does a good parent place restrictions on what their child can and can’t do? Yes. The thing about bad parents is that they are notoriously irresponsible. They would be the least likely to utilize such a feature.


You are talking about going against a cartel of oligopolies that have locked down the technology sector with the IP they control and who have cutthroat control over where the latest technology is deployed. What we at home can do is playact “It’s back to the 90s!” and go back to the technology we had several decades ago, which is more viable than it sounds.
If they want to act like cartels with the greatest and latest, nothing is forcing people to use it. Unfortunately, the technological divide will still be there. Tech minimalism, go human, recycle old tech, we have a lot of crap we’ve disposed off over the years that would otherwise still run fine. To create competition, there needs to be the breeding grounds for it, and if that means having to do with what the lunar lander did, then do so and exercise that brain in the process too.


Devil’s advocate, is it really that bad for someone who is a parent to be able to easily zone of their Linux distro for their children? And yeah, I get there are a number of methods to do this like locking down accounts, but something like this would have the potential of automating whom the rules apply to.


While many of them continue to suck up to the pedophile-in-chief. The irony. It’s very telling that they place all the blame to the last link in the chain, they may very well be able to include entrapment in their defense.


This is the dev rollercoaster, not the prod rollercoaster.


Just because things can be done quickly does not mean they should be.


The only draft I would accept is a police instead of a military one. Force some civilian eyes on how cops handle themselves, wash the profession enough so that it has to survive public scrutiny or otherwise get eventually called out on it.


AI is ignoring so many IP laws while the US government continues to push and collude with its cartels, all the while making sure the technology bubble is all AI and is all US centered. The EU certainly needs to do something, but I imagine many in the EU don’t want to put their own IP at risk.


All devs should be doing something like this. From what you are describing, you are basically dealing with cylon accounts waiting to get activated.


The Home Office’s failure to inform asylum applicants that AI tools are being used in their assessments is likely to be unlawful, according to a legal opinion, published today.
Not nearly as positive.


I naturally assume there’s a distinct lack of humanity and a willingness to act like a psychopath with them.


You never go full ChatGPT.
I mean, if this is the way the average CEO is handling ChatGPT, a lot of things start to make sense.
I’m sorry, I cannot understand your comment.