I suspect they mean that while a lot of sites put on a good show of pretending to give you a choice, they probably either ignore your wishes anyway or they make sure to ask you so often that occasionally you’ll forget and they’ll share your data with data brokers anyway.
The problem is currently being addressed at the low level. I think we have to go higher up the food chain and go after the data brokers.
it's more like knowledge extraction at this point. younger generations don't build up knowledge any more, everyone else is slowly losing their knowledge by not using it.
Eventually the rug pull comes and knowledge will only be accessible by those who can afford it.
it's probably even worse, because knowledge is basically extracted out of all communities and eventually the rug pull comes where you're denied access one way or another.
not only do students graduate now only due to chatgpt but also 10 year old kids never build up education while using ai to do their homework.
tbh I'm not convinced that a git log history should be treated as a group journal because it's not.
relying on git commit messages assumes they're correct by convention since there is no technical constraint to enforce it. and it assumes no work in progress commits, sometimes it's just necessary to hit the save button real quick or move a workspace from one device to another.
my point is:
git is a way of storing and loading files at its core.
reminds me of `don't look up` a bit. there clearly is an imbalance in regards to licenses with model providers, not even talking about knowledge extraction (yes younger people don't learn properly now, older generations forget) shortly before the rug-pull happens in form of accessibility to not rich people
reply