damn I read the headline and thought it said the cops got fired and got my hopes up 😔
Fuuuck they didn't even get fired. What a misleading title
Probably a promotion
Always we focus on the cops and the shooting. What about we take a look at how the situation was even possible. Poor healthcare. And I mean that on both sides. A person who will shoot at a vehicle driving away has mental health issues as well. The system failed all of them.
Nuts.
Someone attacked a vulnerable minority, she fought back, cuttin' a bitch. She freaked out, drove away from police, and they shot her for it. There's been no indication that she was ever a threat to these cops.
'shoot first ask questions later' is not policing. It is gross misconduct.
It is policing though. That's what police are trained to do. They are trained to see us not as humans, but as threats.
Shot dead because this is MURiCAHHH. And we are sociopaths here. USA USA USA... 🤮
Edit:
To the idiot that downvoted, what other country have you heard of where police has shot a woman for defending herself?
To the idiot that downvoted
I AM SPARTICUS!
I don't see votes. I recommend just turning them off in the ui, but some people might view your doomer satire as tiring and defeatist.
As usual trans women are just seen as "acceptable" targets. Those cops have been itching to murder a minority and finally got what they saw as their opportunity. They knew what they were doing.
In a civilized country, that officer would be tried for murder.
I am not aware of any other democracy where the police can run around killing people for nothing and even in their homes, without being tried for murder.
When I write democracy I know USA is not really a democracy, but only a flawed democracy, or a 2nd rate democracy.
"Representative democracy" - representative of the control freak rich holding the purse-strings that have long financed the vast majority of election campaigns.
Ok, but how many films or shows have you seen where the cops shoot at fleeing suspects? I think it's about way more than that - it's about US police's attitude to pursuit.
She needed to be interviewed by police, no question, right? But the police thought that, because she was running away, any means was justified in apprehending her. I think in the mind of a lot of the public too, someone "wanted" for questioning has earnt whatever comes to them if they run.
Whipping up a rage about this murder from the point of view of identity is dangerous, even though it may be a component. We don't know from this, and accusations that may turn out to be wrong are counterproductive. But this was a murder, so we should be directing our rage at what we do know.
To the idiot that downvoted
TBF, as someone else pointed out, people may click on up or down accidentally.
Also, sometimes there have been rather....hot takes. For instance, I've just asked the question about why AI data centers seem to be the one issue that galvanizes resistance, and that question was downvoted like a mofo, LOL.
There's also a tradition I remember fondly from smaller reddit communities of downvoting people who talk about votes, and I like to continue it here hehe. >:)
France and they used us to say look into doesn't happen as often than the US.
Seems like resistance to AI is religious here for some reason.
Usually I would write "almost" on such issues, but it's so bad I can't in good faith call it only almost.
resistance to AI is religious here
A lot of us have an adversarial relationship with large, extractive corporations. AI is a disruptive technology, and sadly that means it usually disrupts power away from working people into the hands of fewer and fewer "elites" and their collaborators.
I'd say there are many well informed reasons to be against virtually (virtually) all use of AI in 202X.
I’d say there are many well informed reasons to be against virtually (virtually) all use of AI in 202X.
Absolutely, and I agree on that.
But most of what we hear is about ChatGPT and Claude. And I agree they are detrimental, and Grok is a joke.
However Deepseek was made for about the equivalent amount Meta uses on Catering, and maybe isn't as disruptive, and doesn't require those enormous datacenters either.
Just because the big ones are insanely harmful in many ways, doesn't mean that AI can't have value.
There are use cases for AI that are actually beneficial, like detecting skin cancer more accurately.
There are use cases for AI that are actually beneficial, like detecting skin cancer more accurately.
Absolutely. I'd love to see local LLMs completely destroy the platforms, and take the cloud computing behemoths with them while they're at it.
So while I'm skeptical of the training methods and incentives behind using any LLM (I was and am similarly skeptical of Kubernetes or any kind of "yaml engineering" to put it in perspective), I don't think the technology itself is necessarily pernicious.
I mean I was just honestly asking the question. I work in tech, and I hear the point/counterpoint on "AI" in the regular, although we don't typically talk about the data centers themselves, more the pros and cons of the tools themselves.
But I'm just puzzled that the same people that literally were chanting, "drill baby drill". They get excited about rolling coal and shutting down wind turbines and shitting on solar. They have wet dreams about "deregulating" companies that pollute AT SCALE while advocating for stupid things like coal to make a comeback. But now they are now....riled up about data centers?
I honestly just cannot understand it. Seriously. Because the impacts of things like coal-fired plants are going to be in their back yard, too, so it's not just NIMBY-ism.
It is odd isn't it? I think we have a perfect neologism for the phenomenon when we say their opinions are largely "vibes based" (as all opinions are to some degree).
So I think you've for NIMBY-ism, right-wing "virtue" signalling, fear of change, fear of scarcity, and imho most hopefully, an honest distrust of big businesses trying to make big disruptive projects without thinking about current workers and their current needs to earn an income for nigh existential reasons.
Sounds like a focus on jobs. Although renewable energy creates jobs, I think they've been brainwashed to think the opposite.
Some of the right seem to think that temporary jobs for data center build-outs will create long-term jobs, but apparently not all of them, or maybe they don't think the "job creation" will outweigh the downsides.
I do wonder how much of it is still inertia from when these absolute idiots were unshakeable in their belief that Big Tech are all a bunch of liberals out to censor conservatives, and "cancel" conservatives and so on...the people that were certain there was a big conspiracy around Biden's "laptop" (hard drive). The people that think that Elon really had to save Twitter from the tyranny of liberals running a tech company. 🤣
I think it's because most people on Lemmy are technologically literate enough and over exposed enough to AI that's it's basically reached a stage where banning it is the default opinion. Personally I just think it's a stupid waste of resources and want these fucking LLM companies to all go bankrupt.
Lemmy is also full of techies whose jobs have been cut or poisoned by AI
Who's job has been cut by AI?
Well, AI-washing. It's used as the excuse for layoffs (I know several people personally), but the leftovers have to work twice as hard to cover the gaps while training the LLMs to do that job too.
Personally I just think it’s a stupid waste of resources and want these fucking LLM companies to all go bankrupt.
100% with you on that.
In 2000 I personally predicted that AI would approach human intelligence around 2030, but I never dreamed it would be this useless.
I'm a bit astonished that I nailed it so closely, it was purely based on estimating the compute power available, and that software would progress together with that. And the estimated power of AI at the time considered to be around the level of a bee.
But I must say I'm disappointed in the application of it, and the crazy raze to invest in and ~~monetize~~ (attempting to monopolize) it.
Honestly it being vaguely on par with the average person is in my opinion more of a statement on how fucking moronic the average person is than anything else, I'd quote George Carlin but that particular quote is pulled up so frequently so as to be repetitive so I won't. Regardless I wouldn't really call this current outcropping of chatbots to be AI but instead that they are VI or virtual intelligence close enough to trick most people on first contact but once you pick it apart enough you can figure it out quite fast. Though even then it's still on the rather primitive side of the theoretical range
The sad part is that there are some bits of tech that started popping off around when this shit started to get popular that does have some really awesome potential such as acoustic diagnostics for machine or those systems that can detect cancer formation months or even years before a doctor could manually detect it. The thing is that while some of these systems may use language models or learning algorithms they basically have no overlap with shit like Chatgpt or Claude, but will almost certainly be hurt when the AI bubble pops just because they share some terminology.
Absolutely AI has good uses, ChatGPT and Claude are not representative for all of AI, but even they have good use cases. But the massive poorly planned build out of data centers is insane.
Here in Denmark new data centers are only allowed as we build out the grid with more renewable energy. And Denmark is a very popular country for data centers, exactly because we have a high degree of renewable energy.
Don't sweat the downvotes. Misclicks, mistaps are easy to do. And I think by far everyone here is largely going to agree with you on this. This is all heinous and unacceptable.
Maybe you are right, but in standard interface downvotes turn red and upvoted blue, so it's pretty hard to misclick without noticing.
Maybe I'm too sensitive, IDK?
It's the internet. People will disagree. Who cares about imaginary scores if you stand by your points? You'll go mad if you need 100% validation.
I have accidentally up or down voted a cartoonish number of things. I generally browse through mobile and my default scrolling motion has caught those arrows a lot
Its Lemmy, we aren't all using the same base software.
In fact I'm not even using Lemmy.
My client uses gestures to up and down vote, I do it on accident all the time.
I've accidentally voted, and embarrassingly commented, while my phone was pocketed and the screen was left on
I can also be sensitive but I understand that if I put something out there it might not be well received and I can't let that get to me
To the idiot that downvoted, what other country have you heard of where police has shot a woman for defending herself?
You want a full list of countries? Or are we restricting this to a single continent? Or NATO block? Or what?
Because Israel is some low hanging fruit.
To the idiot that downvoted, what other country have you heard of where police has shot a woman for defending herself?
Not to diminish the point being made, but there are a lot of countries that commit widespread or even state-sanctioned violence against women. Most of them are third-world hellholes. So the US is in good company.
Has anyone actually died driving towards them? So they have to run?
That just seems like the safer move. Driving away and caring about their safety seems suicidal. If you hit one that's one less gun on you, and the engine block is the part of a car I'd trust most to stop a bullet.
That just seems like the safer move.
Most people aren't equipped to casually take another person's life
Its not a person, its a pig. This really needs to get out more so fewer people are murdered. Seeing pigs as people costs human lives, you said it yourself.
And it doesn't necessarily kill them. If they're busy running out of the way you're still safer, hopefully drop their guns, and even if they keep hold of their guns you've moved farther and started accelerating before they start shooting.
I feel like people need to be more prepared, mentally, morally, etc for self-defense in general but including defending from the state. Think about these things before they come up and hopefully they never actually come up.
And we need a cultural permission structure that permits, and even celebrates self-defense (and an expanded definition of defense that includes defense from state and/or systemic exploitation). The reaction to to what happened with the shooter of the UHC CEO shows we're already on this path.
Fuck.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.