![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/2QNz7bkA1V.png)
Funny. Tech bros insisted that this wouldn’t happen.
Funny. Tech bros insisted that this wouldn’t happen.
Secondly, you’re literally asking for a final version of something without any sort of human testing involved. Can you name a single medical device, ever, which has had exactly 1 version, no updates, and went through 0 human trials before completion?
That’s what the animal trials were supposed to be for. You know what happened to them? They died. They didn’t even wait for the chip to be successful in apes before putting it in a human. If you don’t understand why that’s fucked up, I can’t help you.
Removed by mod
You haven’t been keeping up with the news have you? The chip malfunctioned, and Elon knew it was going to.
Because it kills everything you put it in? I don’t know how to tell you that you’re supposed to care about other people.
WHAT THE FUCK
This is gonna get worse
before it gets better.
I could have sworn Atari was bankrupt. Where’d they get the money to acquire anything?
YouTube’s algorithm is garbage though, so that information is worthless. Pretty sure it pushes right wing stuff on anyone remotely interested in politics regardless of affiliation. As for me, my watch history is off, so that isn’t possible in the first place.
Stonetoss is a Nazi. Please don’t give him exposure.
Ruined. Fuck you.
Doesn’t it, though?
It used to normal to beat your kids. It was wrong then and it’s wrong now.
This is what the players wanted, and the industry listened.
The reason we are having this conversation in the first place is because people didn’t want it.
This isn’t forced upon anybody.
They added it the game post-launch, after reviews had already come out. Anyone morally opposed to micro transactions (which as I’ll get to in next point, have a very good reason to be opposed to on principle) who had bought the game has been tricked into supporting a business practice they despise. This is incredibly scummy and should rightfully be seen as a dick move.
It only becomes a moral problem if somebody’s choices are circumvented, but that’s not really what’s happening here.
Micro transactions as a concept are strategically designed to exploit people with addictive personalities. This is not a theory on my part, this is legitimately what the intent behind them is. But don’t take my word for it, here’s a video discussing that very thing.
Something being normalized doesn’t automatically make it morally okay.
So tech outpaces legislation, as it is wont to do since legislation is notoriously slow, and so because of that our reaction should be to throw our hands up and not even try? Perhaps you don’t sympathize as much as you think you do.
I looked it up and you’re right. I must of been thinking of a different crime. That’ll teach me to go spouting off about stuff.
My point that AI is programmed to recycle and humans aren’t is still something I stand by, so I edited my comment.
You’re comparing something humans often do subconsciously to a machine that was programmed to do that. Unless you’re arguing that intent doesn’t matter (pretty much every judge in America will tell you it does) then we’re talking about 2 completely different things.
Edit: Disregard the struck out portion of my comment. Apparently I don’t know shit about law. My point is that comparing a a quirk of human psychology to the strict programming of a machine is a false equivalency.
That is literally a swastika.
I seem to recall digital trading card games existing long before NFTs were ever thought up, so not even that works. In fact, every “use” for NFTs I’ve ever seen suggested has been something we already had that is actually easier without involving the things.
Transphobe who talks like a JRPG villain. Here’s a rationalwiki article about her.
What artist? You mean the computer program? Somehow I don’t think it cares.