There are different things we’re calling AI. One is engaging in endeavors that are traditionally seen as creative, like text or image generation.

The AI we are talking about for this story is a text to speech engine that creates a believable voice. The voice parameters may be created by a human or AI or whatever. But that creation of the parameters of a voice is not the type of AI that we are talking about in this story.

This is stealing her voice. It’s just plain wrong.

What I really don’t understand is, even if you think AI voice is okay, why not just make an original voice? Why you got to steal somebody’s voice? Or if you don’t want to do that, why not just get consent for the specific thing you’re doing? Don’t take advantage of the fact that she previously recorded her voice as an aid for the blind and steal her voice because of some small text in a contract. That’s dishonest and pathetic.

You’re the railway. Do you know how many people love and obsess over trains and railways? There are probably tons of people who would pay to hear an AI version of their voice coming from the train speakers. How did it come to this? How incompetent can you be?

I mean, that’s right on the mark. The reason they called themselves National Socialists isn’t because they were socialists, but because they knew that their true beliefs were so abhorrent that they needed to lie about being socialists.

Elon Musk has been recently shown to have done the same thing.

I’d think it would be obvious that a country wouldn’t want to depend on a foreign country’s proprietary product when an open source alternative exists. Even if it’s not spying, what if the US forced Microsoft to put some kill switch on their products? Even if it doesn’t affect your most secure systems because of air gap, it could still cripple enough to cause huge problems.

There’s simply no reason to take the risk.

If I was running a government, I would strongly desire proof that all of my government software is doing only what I want it to. That means not only do I have access to the source code, but I also need it to be simple enough that my government teams can actually audit all of it.

Obviously, that’s not going to be feasible in every situation. There might be proprietary software that is protected from competition via IP laws, and some software is so necessarily complex that it would be really hard to audit completely, but overall, I find it shocking that any foreign government would run a Microsoft product when a feature comparable open source alternative exists.

From the headline, it almost sounds as if they’re forcing the museums to let people in without paying if they have a doctor’s note.

But it’s actually a program funded by the city that pays for a limited number of people’s admissions if prescribed by a doctor.

Honestly, even if museums were being forced to forego admission fees, they’d probably be okay with it if it’s not too many people. It gets new people to come in who wouldn’t typically be in a museum. It’s almost like a doctor advertising for them.

This is the same market that tried to add blockchain to everything when that first became well-known.

Some of the biggest forces in the market are extraordinarily stupid people trying to ride every buzzword that comes along.

Basically, if you disagree with the moderators about what is appropriate content for a community, it is difficult to find any path forward.

My take is that Slashdot’s vision was of a single community, which limited its scale.

Reddit’s voting and moderation design is basically flawed, and the parts of that which Lemmy has copied are flawed in exactly the same way.

Any system that requires people to be in a position of power, yet not abuse that power, is broken.

I’m not saying that it’s the best solution, but when I used to use Slashdot, it seems like it would randomly ask people to moderate comments (who had opted in), rather than have preset moderators. And then presumably, they would collate the results of multiple moderators and use that to decide who could be trusted with more moderation.

This is one example of a method to avoid power tripping mods.

I don’t have context, but you might have been baited into that conversation by somebody whose goal was to get participants banned. The reason I say this is that it’s such a strange topic to start with. The two options don’t seem to have anything to do with each other, and both options are violent.

“There’s nothing more expensive than a free gift.” - Michel de Montaigne

When asked about Musk and Huffman’s correspondence, Reddit spokesperson Gina Antonini sent the following statement: “We take any report of Reddit policy violations seriously, whether on Reddit directly or through other public or private means. We will evaluate content reported to us and take action if violating.”

There was a famous reddit user called Unidan who I think was a scientist that studied animals. His account was eventually banned for Terms of Service violations due to his having an account that posted comments, and several other accounts that were just used for voting. He used the other accounts to give his comments an initial voting boost, which was a policy violation, and was therefore permanently banned.

Anyways, I occasionally noticed a strange voting pattern on Reddit. I’d have one comment that had not gotten any votes or replies for hours after I wrote it, and then all of a sudden, somebody would reply to argue, and their reply would more-or-less instantly have several upvotes, and simultaneously, my comment would have a similar number of downvotes.

This person was obviously using multiple accounts, violating the Terms of Service just like Unidan, so I went to report them, only to find out that there was literally no way for me to report them. The report button didn’t have any fitting option, nor was it guaranteed to go to a reddit admin who could actually look at who voted for what. Mods can’t see comment votes. There was a separate webpage you could go to to contact the admins, but again, there was no category for it, and no way to make a report that didn’t fit those categories.

From that experience, it didn’t feel like they would “take any report of Reddit policy violations seriously.” How could they take the report seriously when they wouldn’t even take the report in the first place? Now I see I was supposed to directly contact Reddit CEO Steve Huffman through private messaging.

Why not just make your own subreddit then?

The ellipsis locations are another giveaway. I noticed them before I read the rest of the text.

Nancy Mangione.

This edit is done so well. Very believable.

In the original comic, she is asking for money to go to the circus, and the last panel shows her and the banker at the circus together eating ice cream.

I’m guessing you’re basing it off of this official legal correspondence, which I am including below for people who haven’t seen it:

Dear Mr. Cox:

Attached is a letter that we received on November 19, 1974. I feel that you should be aware that some asshole is signing your name to stupid letters.

Very truly yours,

CLEVELAND STADIUM CORP.

James N. Bailey, General Counsel

cc: Arthur B. Modell

Even if you’re careful when writing your comment, it makes no difference if the admin reading your comment is not careful or has poor reading comprehension.

This is what happens when you have no rights and another person is given power over you. Even if they think they’re not being abusive, any small misunderstanding always ends in you being abused.

It says they use publicly exposed or leaked IAM keys with RW permission to do this, in case anybody is interested in how they get in.

True enough for urban areas.

There’s also a lot of more rural areas in Japan where the only thing in walking distance from a house is a bus stop, and it might be a bit of a long walk.

I’m sure there are more remote places, but I haven’t been to those places.

An AI that can suck the joy and humanity out of everything? Up until now, that was something only humans could do.