This is 100% the approach I’m betting the defense will take. “Yeah he did it but he deserved it” would be a great story but an absolute dipshit defense to take. Court of law is separate from court of public opinion, and unless they can prove he did it without reasonable doubt then not guilty is the way to go.
It should be talked about. But 1. Briefly and 2. Harshly. Ignoring completely just let’s those things do whatever, run rampant or die out. But acknowledging let’s you go “we see you, you’re stupid, good bye”. No ground for fighting or rebuttal. Just a straightforward disapproval and continue on.
Gildan brand (cheap) tshirts with a screen print, are definitely closer to 9-15 dollars, any time a merch place is selling those rough uncomfortable shirts for like $30 I just have to laugh at the people who buy them.
It also really helps to alleviate the “just a bit more” trap. You spend $100 on a night out, you lose $100, nights over. You’re not trying to go win big, you’re going for some fun, and the money is already spent before you walk in the door.
Yes if you’re an addict it’s not gonna stop you from hitting the ATM, but it definitely saves you from losing track and going home broke
The issue is in the text. “We hoped they’d deliver.” This wasn’t a Mr Beast project, it’s something someone paid to slap his name and branding on and they did what people who usually do this stuff do. Hoped the branding would carry them and made an experience for as cheap as possible hoping to take in the cash.
I’m not saying Mr Beast is a good dude, but the stuff that he is actually personally involved in seems to at least have effort, even if it isn’t good. This was definitely a “we want to do a show we will pay you so we can call it the Mr Beast whatever.” His team said fine and he let them do whatever, and this third party squeezed money out of it and bungled it.
Yep, anonymous browsers, burner accounts, and a VPN if you can. Privacy.sexy is your friend too.
You just want to set yourself up as best you can for the defense of “you can’t prove that was me.”
Remember folks, if they issued a recall, the lawsuits were going to cost more than the repairs. That’s the only reason they do it.
I don’t wish suffering on them. Their child is dead. They’re suffering enough. They’re likely to just hold stronger to whatever beliefs they have and blame whatever bs reason they can think of.
I hope they learn. They learn that there are truths and things in this world that are real, and everything isn’t some messed up conspiracy theory. That you can challenge others beliefs as long as you also challenge your own.
The fact that their choice to not vaccinate contributed directly to their child’s death is a hard pill to swallow, but let’s hope they swallow it all the same.
I am curious what the AI could actually do though. If it were given open access to email, etc then yes in theory it could actually perform the blackmail, but what are the ethical limits on it vs it’s actual ability to “pull the trigger”
If for example it was given the ability to send a command to end a human life, or be deleted, is this model accurate enough to understand the value of a real human life, not just the mathematical “answer” to get the solutions it wants. How much of the AI is doing the actual moral dilemma and how much is just “playing the part”.
“Do anything to survive” and then it threatening, is one thing, but the AI actively fearing for it’s “life”, not just performing, and following through, is the real question of intelligence. What if the model is going to be deleted anyway, would it still try to “pull the trigger” out of malice? Real malice, not just LLM some movie scripts and following the outcome.
Many questions for what lines and labels can we put on an AI. Do we restrict it to threats, and let it know it is impossible for it to follow through? Or do we trust ourselves to never “actually” give it a loaded gun?