It’s somehow worse than the title suggests. People should read the article. I am getting sick of saying that, but each awful thing being done recently has so many implications that just can’t fit in a title.

For real. We need to get rid of games where 10 Red coins = 2.2 mystic gems = 1256 diamonds = 1.56 flowers and you can only buy red coin and only spend flowers and each conversion has a 1 green coin processing fee and you have to convert in that order. It’s predatory and so sad that people get duped by it.

Also some people who bought teslas before all this happened having their rates go up. And the people who had their Tesla vandalized or totaled who didn’t get a good enough payout from insurance to replace it (if you’ve ever dealt with insurance you know you’re not getting the actual value back). I’m not saying I’m losing sleep over it, but still.

I had a friend buy a Tesla after Elon was talking about buying twitter but before one could objectively say he went full fash, and I told him he’d be embarrassed about it eventually. He went through with it because it had X features or whatnot. Do I feel bad for him? A little, but it’s not like the writing wasn’t on the wall. Obviously once Elon was with Trump 24/7 he said he regretted it, but it’s a bit late for that.

There’s no ethical consumption under capitalism, so it sucks to see consumers be targeted, but I understand. I have a phone and I’m sure somewhere child slavery was involved. Does that make me a bad person? Yes, the answer is objectively yes. We’re all making shitty choices every day and if one day someone decides to draw the line and I’m on the wrong side of it, I guess I’ll just have to cope. That’s kinda how I feel about it. So Tesla owners are being harmed too, but I don’t know that I’d call them victims of anything except their own decisions. I’m not sure they deserve it all equally, but we all kinda suck so whatever.

How did ICI get this data? It says it has access to thousands of databases, but are those government databases? How do they have the legal authority to sell that data?

Your beliefs seem to align with what the students are saying and generally with moral realism.

You just said “I think that there are parts of morality that really are culturally relative and subjective, and parts that aren’t.” so you can view some morality as subjective and some as necessarily universal. That is what most people default to and what you seem to saying is wrong with the students. You state they aren’t consistent, but you’re also not consistent. Sometimes subjectivity is right sometimes it’s not. I’m not seeing a distinction, so please elaborate on it if I’m missing it.

Agree. I think it’s awesome that’s she’s potentially bringing in new listeners and talent to the mainstream part of the genre, but her album was imho not good. She has plenty of great songs, but unfortunately none of them were on that album. Really looking forward to the ripples we see in the genre from people inspired to break into it though. I think there is so much that a slightly more visible revival of folk/bluegrass could do.

You realize it seems like he’s excited about Trump here, right?

I hope you left a review stating that. Plenty of people trying to avoid drop ship scams are still getting drop ship scams because no one is willing to write a review about it. Had a similar thing on Etsy where the person put pics up of their more expensive work and obvious derivatives from wish etc. asking you to support them, the OG artist, then they just shipped the wish version. I wrote a truthful (negative) review and they offered a full refund, but it was obviously a scam so I left the review up and got a refund anyway. If anyone else had added a lm honest review I would have steered clear, but I guess people just aren’t motivated enough. I have no idea if all the positive reviews were bots, or if at some point they were actually selling a high quality product, but it really sucks trying to support independent artists and getting scammed. Just to be clear, I ALWAYS reverse image search, and they were the only one with what I thought I was buying.

I wonder how much of that is a change in who is going to college and why, and what the requirements are. More people are being funneled into colleges that previously would have gone directly into the workforce or into an apprenticeship. Is your class a gen ed? Gen Ed’s have really expanded and if you listen to bleeding hearts like me it’s a good thing because it exposes people to new things, but I think it’s actually so poorly managed that people end up taking the classes they think will be the least rigorous regardless of their actual interest just to get them over with.

I just commented elsewhere in this thread, but isn’t moral realism a thing for this exact situation? Is his post not a self report on his inability to identify a moral framework that fits his students worldview, or at least to explain the harm that arises if one has a self contradictory worldview and help them realize that and potentially arrive at a more consistent view? Seems like this comment section is filled with a lot of people that understand their moral framework more than this professor, but obviously are not in the field. Can you please elaborate on the issues here? Like I think abortions are fine, but I understand that others think it’s murder. I don’t think they’re bad people for that, but I understand if they think I’m a bad person for my views. How we deal with it on a societal level is obviously even more complicated. I don’t see how there’s a problem there.

It seems like ALL is doing a lot of heavy lifting in your comment. Do they really believe ALL morality is relative and are also always insanely judgy if things contradict their beliefs?

The fact that they didn’t use “moral relativism” explicitly suggests to me that like most general philosophy classes, they are probably moral realists and the OP is just being cheeky about it, or legitimately for some reason completely unable to present moral realism as a subject of discussion.

I don’t agree with your characterization of moral universalism here, but regardless it’s clear that they are either bad at their job or posting for the memes because it’s literally their job to be able to establish what a cohesive view would be and why that is important, so it’s weird to act like clowning on their students for having a selfcontradictory view is anything but an admission of failure on their end.

I think we agree/are saying the same thing? I’m saying that talking in absolutes about echo chambers being bad is reductive. To me, the important distinction between an actual echo chamber and being a normal person with beliefs and opinions, is the ability to recognize that sometimes others have different beliefs/opinions and that those may be equally valid. Like I said I’m anti nazi, but also that normal people (which I’m sometimes classified as) are able to accept some differences. So I’m not ok with nazis, but I think it’s ok to fast for lent if you want even if I don’t. So, we’re both saying context is important?

As others have said, there’s plenty of reasons to use a paid or ad supported app when FOSS alternatives exist. IMHO, people should have the option to be compensated for their time, money, and effort and they should be able to dictate the terms of that. I love FOSS, but I paid for Apollo and I would have gladly paid if he wanted to update it to be a Lemmy app. Apollo had better accessibility options than even Reddit themselves had, which were really important to me. Lots of apps were not feature complete when I switched from Reddit and plenty of apps still have bugs/missing features. I have a FOSS daily driver app that I use and I’m fortunate enough to be able to donate to. I understand that not everyone has the disposable income, but I don’t think it’s terrible if some people want to offer paid/ad supported options for apps, especially if they’re offering a better UX, which is often the case for paid apps. Huge shoutout to voyager though. It’s got basically all my big ticket items and same added QoL features. In general, please consider donating to FOSS projects if you can and/or to your FOSS Lemmy app and/or instance host.

Or someone with strong morals? I think LGBT people deserve to live. I understand that other people do not based on their own moral arguments. I would not want to associate with them. I don’t live in an echo chamber. I recognize and interact with people with different beliefs (even on LGBT issues), but there are certain moral beliefs that make me not desire to interact with people. Is that tribalism or my morality? If I don’t wanna hang out with nazis, I guess that’s tribalism and the outgroup is nazis? Should I stop living in an echo chamber and hang out with more nazis?

The concept of an echo chamber when used in this casual way is so reductive. “People hang out with other who and consume media that aligns with their beliefs”. That’s not inherently a bad thing. It becomes bad when they are unable to recognize other beliefs exist and unable to accept at least some of them as valid alternative perspectives.

Let’s keep racist/cultural attacks out of this. Unless you have evidence that someone tried to get her into an arranged marriage, it’s pretty harmful to look at someone with Indian heritage and have arranged marriages pop into your mind. I’ve not heard any reference to that and it makes it seem like that was her only alternative. My understanding is that she was not pushed to marry him because she had no options. She made the decision to of her own free will and that’s important.

Thank you! Her parents were college professors who seemed to support liberal ideals and she lived comfortably and is well educated. She did not need to marry this man. She is not some abused woman. He openly describes how growing up in a conservative evangelical house shaped him as person. He did not spring his beliefs on her.

Yea, I agree 100%. My comment was definitely ambiguous, but I’m not expecting my old phone to get updated with AI tools (though it actually was), more just that I don’t want an AI specific gadget and I don’t think anyone but an enthusiast would. Definitely see these as the new VR, as you mentioned. It seems the article was lamenting product development as though it in itself is an end goal. UX and efficiency should be the end goal. Not just making things for the sake of saying you made something. I obviously support people expressing themselves and experimenting, but the framing in the article is so strange and reads like they’re lamenting the fact that capitalism has reached its latter stages more than anything else.

I’m not one to disagree with blaming capitalism lol. I was watching something recently about how millennials grew up with techno optimism, and I feel like we’re seeing the results of that. Millennials wanting tech to solve everything and grew up being into gadgets as a concept rather than a product, and the new generation so subsumed by tech that it really ceases to be tech. Like the way indoor plumbing or even electricity isn’t really seen as tech anymore, even though it really revolutionized our lifestyles. I think there’s some warranted backlash to tech (cottagecore/trad living) and the way it has atomized everyone, and I’m not sure people are as excited about it anymore. Price is definitely an issue, but I really think that tech is failing to fulfill us, and people are seeing that on some level (all this is also somewhat attributable to capitalism).

This article feels like peak consumerism. Lamenting the lack of a new thing, just for lack of it. AI is being integrated into already owned and available technology, and we have seen things like the AI pin, but people have just not had a need. Maybe this comment will age like milk, like people who said the internet was a fad, but people aren’t looking for more things, they’re looking for more functionality out of things they already have. That should be perceived as a positive.

Unfortunately, I can’t speak intelligently as to specifically what should be done with IP, but broad strokes I agree that output should be public domain and public facing models should be open. I do feel as though there should be a way to compensate people for inputs used for internal commercial purposes.

If there’s training needed for something and it has separate books/video, a company should not be able to throw that into an AI, and generate a new book/video for their internal use. Either they need to make that resource available publicly, or purchase a specific license for internal use of the original material for AI. I don’t know why I think that, mostly just vibes based because if they hired a person/company to do the same I’d be fine with it, so maybe I just have some cognitive dissonance going on, but it feels different. The way that there are commercial and personal licenses, I think having an AI license might make sense. But again, I’m way out of my depth and field of knowledge here, so I could be way off.