Skip to content
linux-nerds.org

linux-nerds.org
  1. Übersicht
  2. Technology
  3. Ted Cruz's plan to punish states that regulate AI shot down in 99-1 vote

Ted Cruz's plan to punish states that regulate AI shot down in 99-1 vote

Technology
43 38 0
Anmelden zum Antworten

  • tonytins@pawb.socialT

    Teachers Are Not OK

    Technology technology
    18
    1
    253 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    curious_canid@lemmy.caC
    AI is so far from being the main problem with our current US educational system that I'm not sure why we bother to talk about it. Until we can produce students who meet minimum standards for literacy and critical thinking, AI is a sideshow.
  • T

    Just launched a social platform where every post is a poll and am looking for feedback!

    Technology technology
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • A

    America’s drone 9/11 is coming — and just like on 9/11, we aren’t ready

    Technology technology
    21
    77 Stimmen
    21 Beiträge
    17 Aufrufe
    G
    Because the trillions is the point.. Not security.
  • avidamoeba@lemmy.caA

    Founder of 23andMe buys back company out of bankruptcy auction

    Technology technology
    60
    1
    348 Stimmen
    60 Beiträge
    23 Aufrufe
    A
    Come on up to Canada, we still got that garlic bomb. I can still taste the one from last week
  • P

    Forget Big Brother. It’s the startups silently watching workers now.

    Technology technology
    18
    1
    324 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    D
    Do you think a plumber dreams about being a plumber?
  • S

    DeepSeek's distilled new R1 AI model can run on a single GPU | TechCrunch

    Technology technology
    21
    1
    88 Stimmen
    21 Beiträge
    31 Aufrufe
    J
    The self hosted model has hard coded censored content.
  • P

    Community Notes vanishes from X feeds, raising 'serious questions' amid ongoing EU probe

    Technology technology
    94
    1
    462 Stimmen
    94 Beiträge
    43 Aufrufe
    L
    Make them publishers or whatever is required to have it be a legal requirement, have them ban people who share false information. The law doesn't magically make open discussions not open. By design, social media is open. If discussion from the public is closed, then it's no longer social media. ban people who share false information Banning people doesn't stop falsehoods. It's a broken solution promoting a false assurance. Authorities are still fallible & risk banning over unpopular/debatable expressions that may turn out true. There was unpopular dissent over covid lockdown policies in the US despite some dramatic differences with EU policies. Pro-palestinian protests get cracked down. Authorities are vulnerable to biases & swayed. Moreover, when people can just share their falsehoods offline, attempting to ban them online is hard to justify. If print media, through its decline, is being held legally responsible Print media is a controlled medium that controls it writers & approves everything before printing. It has a prepared, coordinated message. They can & do print books full of falsehoods if they want. Social media is open communication where anyone in the entire public can freely post anything before it is revoked. They aren't claiming to spread the truth, merely to enable communication.
  • P

    T-Mobile secretly records iPhone screens and claims it's being helpful.

    Technology technology
    81
    1
    479 Stimmen
    81 Beiträge
    47 Aufrufe
    douglasg14b@lemmy.worldD
    Did I say that it did? No? Then why the rhetorical question for something that I never stated? Now that we're past that, I'm not sure if I think it's okay, but I at least recognize that it's normalized within society. And has been for like 70+ years now. The problem happens with how the data is used, and particularly abused. If you walk into my store, you expect that I am monitoring you. You expect that you are on camera and that your shopping patterns, like all foot traffic, are probably being analyzed and aggregated. What you buy is tracked, at least in aggregate, by default really, that's just volume tracking and prediction. Suffice to say that broad customer behavior analysis has been a thing for a couple generations now, at least. When you go to a website, why would you think that it is not keeping track of where you go and what you click on in the same manner? Now that I've stated that I do want to say that the real problems that we experience come in with how this data is misused out of what it's scope should be. And that we should have strong regulatory agencies forcing compliance of how this data is used and enforcing the right to privacy for people that want it removed.