Honestly, I’d love to see more research on how AI CSAM consumption affects consumption of real CSAM and rates of sexual abuse.

Because if it does reduce them, it might make sense to intentionally use datasets already involved in previous police investigations as training data. But only if there’s a clear reduction effect with AI materials.

(Police has already used some materials, with victims’ consent, to crack down on CSAM sharing platforms in the past).

I feel like our relationship to it is also quite messed.

AI doesn’t actually undress people, it just draws a naked body. It’s an artistic representation, not an X-ray. You’re not getting actual nudes in this process, and AI has no clue how the person looks like naked.

Now, such images can be used to blackmail people, because again, our culture didn’t quite catch up with the fact that every nude image can absolutely be AI-generated fake. When it does, however, I fully expect creators of such things to be seen as odd creeps spreading their fantasies around and any nude imagery to be seen as fake by default.

Oil

Also an easy win over a long PITA of US leaders to boost reputation among MAGA folks

That would be good, yes. A more relaxed approach to vaccination has caused plethora of public health problems.

Side effects tend to get less likely when we get more experience working with vaccines of a certain type. Modern coronavirus vaccines are better and safer than the first ones already, and flu ones have been around for so long that making a new vaccine very safe is no issue.

Meanwhile, side effects caused by repeated exposure to the disease may compound very badly.

Vaccines have side effects.

No one argues with that. But you know what also has side effects that are orders of magnitude more likely? Diseases.

Forcing people to is where I have the issue

I understand that mandatory policies are to be reviewed with caution, and forcing people to do something that has inherent risks should normally be avoided. But here, by not taking a vaccine, you simply multiply and outsource the risk elsewhere, putting others in danger. If your decisions around vaccination would only hurt you, government would have no business dictating you what to do - yet, someone’s refusal to vaccinate has killed someone else - say, immunodeficient person or a child who couldn’t get vaccinated.

Sometimes we desperately need collective action, so much so that it may be mandated. This is one of such cases. Yes, it would be cool to have more time and do even more testing, to refine the preparations, etc. But when people die by millions, you’re on a short timer.

COVID-19 has demonstrated a level of deadly disorganization in the face of a global crisis. People “mind their own business” so much that it kills others, with governments struggling to keep everyone looking in the same productive direction.

Depending on the country, it might be banned, and that’s one obvious example I came with.

And, in my opinion, it must be, no matter what you smoke, tobacco or weed or something else. Why the hell should others inhale terrible chemicals just because you chose to?

Same, why should they be exposed to dangerous microbes just because you are reckless?

It quickly gets more complicated when it affects others.

Is it your bodily choice to smoke on the street? No, because others have to inhale it. Same idea - no one wants to breathe in your disease-causing microbes.

On the death rate: in some countries, mortality rate went as high as 5%. To be fair, though, this only takes confirmed cases into account, leaving behind those who never reported a case, mostly because it went milder.

https://ourworldindata.org/mortality-risk-covid

On a personal note, my mother lost two colleagues to it, and I lost an acquaintance. All confirmed COVID deaths.

I did get COVID-19 once. It went easy though, and I rapidly recovered after a mild fatigue and headache without long-term consequences. Some of the people I know had long-term effects, like warped smell, chronic fatigie, etc. One got it before vaccines rolled out, and two decided not to vaccinate. None of the vaccinated folks I know had something of this magnitude.

Vaccine is not a protection from infection. It’s a pre-training program for an immune system to quickly beat the hell out of the disease before it gets nasty (and spreads violently).

Sad you got side effects, and I understand how it changes your perception on the matter. Personally, my only bad experience is having weakness in the arm for the first two days after the very first vaccine dose. In any case, I hope it will pass rather soon!

Every pre-COVID representation of global pandemic: scientists discover a vaccine, everyone vaccinates and lives happily ever after

Real pandemic: people chicken out, start obsessing over 1 in 10000 side effects (vs, you know, a 1 in 50 chance to die of COVID-19 at the time) and then forever tell the story of “it’s not tested enough yet”.

You know what also constantly changes and cannot be tested for decades? Every. Single. Virus. Your flu vaccine is also not tested for side effects forever, because the virus changes all the time.

Before rolling COVID vaccines out, we were very damn sure they work and won’t wreak havoc on you. But as people suddenly decided to go anti-vax, government had to get more assertive, for any vaccine works best when most people are vaccinated. You could normally self-isolate and not take vaccines, though, so it’s up to you, the government’s concern is that you don’t spread this thing further, straining medical system that was already under a heavy load.

Disclaimer: not a medical professional. Had four COVID-19 vaccines though, including Sputnik-V, the very first one.

We are certainly shaped by our upbringing in a big way, but we can learn throughout life and change whatever concerns us

I start to wonder if maybe her parents were similar - did provide materially, but not emotionally. Striving through this (and getting hurt along the way) might have taught her to ignore the emotional and she might start thinking it’s a good strategy overall.

As per the rest - she doesn’t need any mind control devices to pull these tricks on you. She doesn’t even have to be intentional about it.

See, an infant is infinitely attached to and dependent on the mother, as it is naturally the only way of survival. At this point, the life of a child is firmly in the mother’s hands, all-round.

As kids grow up, though, they learn to think for themselves, to be independent, to disagree with their parents and act their own way. Some parents are not ready for this shift, and exert an ever increasing amount of pressure to control their children, to ensure they act exactly as their parents please. There are many tools for that, and your mother seems to manipulate your need of love and acceptance. She thinks she can use your feeling of hurt and neglect to teach you the “right ways”.

These “ways”, though, are nothing but her own desires and her vision that doesn’t always align with your reality. She may never have suffered depression, and she never got to properly reflect on the issue, so she accepted the wrong narrative that depression is laziness, and now pushes it on you the same way she pushed everything else. By making you feel not loved nor accepted when you do something “wrong” in her book.

Now, what part of your thoughts you should be “locked up” over? The fact you rightfully feel manipulated? Or the fact that you attribute it to some mysterious CIA mind control (read: any external circumstance)? Both are things therapists see on the regular, they can work with it, and all it takes is some talking sessions and maybe simple meds in some cases. Seriously, go for it, you’ll be in a much better place (at least mentally) in a few months if you do, and it won’t be such a big pressure on your life anymore.

Getting therapy and learning to do things your own way without consulting your mom every step of the way may not only improve your own wellbeing, but your mom’s, too. One thing controlling parents need is seeing their kids do things their own way and being just fine. When that happens, your mom will learn to trust you to yourself and finally relax for once. It will also significantly improve your relationships.

Source: went through a very similar thing, then after 1,5 years of therapy I’m free and my mom still loves me the same and we both live a calmer happier life now. After conflicts ended and the dust is settled, our relationships are better than they’ve ever been. She doesn’t want to go back to what was before, and neither do I.

It doesn’t have to be one or the other. Communal action and solidarity are essential for providing benefits to individuals.

You may ask your boss to raise your pay, likely to be rejected, or you can join a union and demand a much higher pay and better working conditions.

You may do your best to add small niceties to shared spaces, or you can unite with your neighbors and make the community thrive.

You may stand alone against injustice, only to be moved when convenient. Or you can walk the streets together, making your shared concerns heard.

Neither of it is actually much ideologically tied, and it can go in any direction. But the point is, collective action is best when addressing issues many people face individually.

Building a culture of self-made individualism is a deliberate attempt to remove the levers of power granted by collective action, and to make it easier to crush dissent on the way to build an authoritarian dystopia.

That’s not to say collective action cannot be abused to make a very ugly society - fascism is one example - but that the best results are achieved when the individuals retain their own views, but are willing to cooperate over the shared issues.

Fair enough

My favorite is KDE asking for user password upon waking from sleep even if you have autologin enabled.

So, all you have to do to circumvent the login window is to reboot.

Name one communist state, as in a state that has communism as an economic system

Socialism is generally associated with greater housing availability and lower levels of extreme poverty.

Absolutely. Not housing only, but housing first. The rest should come as well.

Not really, because we’re talking about what serves people best.

Most people have homes under virtually any political and economic system. So, when we do compare, we know capitalism fails us way more often.

Sure, simply providing housing may not solve everything, and complex measures must be taken to ensure mental wellbeing, fiscal responsibility, lack of addictions etc.

But housing and income must come first, as not having that prevents effective therapy. When you’re in survival mode, you’re not particularly productive resolving your other issues.

Again, hopefully these are all jokes.

Capitalism doesn’t bring us anything; it’s a distribution system. No machines will suddenly disappear if it’s gone, no researchers, developers and engineers will suddenly die, and the world will just keep spinning.

Hopefully you’re joking, but in case you are not: poverty is not due to lack of resources, but the problems around their distribution.

Killing the poor will just make those previously better off drift into the poor category.

Even if only the richest 1% survives, most of them will lose their positions and become poor, as there will be no workforce, inflation will go through the roof, and a competition will play out all over again, leading some to be the masters and some to be the slaves.