Isn't the same true of in the EU though? Immigrants and refugees from Syria were treated quite harshly and has led to a significant rise in far right parties across Europe. These parties are actively harassing immigrants and non-white groups. But there doesn't seem to be riots in the streets over it.
It's almost flipped how the US and Europe have dealt with threats. The US has a long history of organized hate groups having the run of things. I don't Europe has experienced anything like the KKK for as long. However Europe is not far removed from fascist and authoritarian regimes. So things are more fresh in the minds of citizens and they are more likely to fight them. However when attacked through another method it subverts that and allows tacit approval from the public while their neighborhoods are transformed for the worse.
> These parties are actively harassing immigrants and non-white groups. But there doesn't seem to be riots in the streets over it.
It is true, we have vigilante groups going around sometimes acting violent against people they think are immigrants, it is a real problem. It isn't all across Europe, and it isn't super common, but it happens, and that's enough.
I think the difference is in who is coordinating these efforts, because none of those vigilante groups are the country's own border patrol doing that in "official business" capacity, they're small groups of individuals usually associated with some far-right political groups, rather than tax funded government groups.
If the latter were to happen, you can be pretty sure people wouldn't put up with it, because most of us realize what's coming after that, because we were all forced to study history growing up.
> So things are more fresh in the minds of citizens and they are more likely to fight them
Yeah, this seems to be a big factor, most of us here (Europe) still have parents (and grand-parents) who remember and witnessed a lot of awful shit, and growing up would immediately reprimand you if you just pretended to like that, or carry thoughts in those veins.
We are very weary of that in Europe. I consider it to be the case thag the "Rechtsruck" (sudden movement to the right) is a global phenomenon. Alls the right extremist are orienting themselves after the model of what Trumpism is doing which at least thats true for my personally, is why I am ver y concerned of what is happening kn the US. I grew up to a jazz sax playing father to whom the culture the GI brought here was progressive and related to freedom. It feels loke that idea of the US is dead now.
As to why this phenomenon is happening - i would speculate that it has to do with the polarisation that is happening in the face a ever faster progressing disintegration of the social fabric into technology accompanied by the prospect of a scarcity of resources caused by an impeding breakdown of the biosphere and the climate system with which it coevolved plus on a more local scale an extreme increase of inequality of wealth distribution.
This is another non-solution from Trump. Similar to the "no taxes on tips" nonsense that applies to almost no one since the cap is so high. It's a populist move that doesn't address the problem but appears to be a good thing for working class people at first sight.
These devkits are old and have already been released to consumer laptops over a year ago. So if you want to you can pick up pretty much any CoPilot+ PC. I'm not sure what your problem here is though.
We've already got a taste of that with people like Megyn Kelly saying "it's not pedophilia, it's ephebophilia" when talking about Epstein and his connections. Not surprising though. When you have no principles you'll go as far as possible to "trigger the libs".
Context matters. In this case we're talking about Grok on X. It's not a philosophical debate if open or closed models are good. It's a debate (even though it shouldn't be) about Grok producing CSAM on X. If this was about what users do with their own models on their local machines then things would be different since that's not openly accessible or part of one of the biggest sites on the net. I think most people would argue that public facing LLM's have some responsibility to the public. As would any IP owner.
I think the question of if X should do more to prevent this kind of abuse (I think they should) is separate from Grok or LLM's though. I get that since xAI and X are owned by the same person there is some complications here, but most of the arguments I'm reading have to do with the LLM specifically, not just lax moderation policies.
The author has a myopic view on Gen AI videos. They only focus on the most extreme examples and then hand wave cat videos as some crisis about reality. We had these exact same alarmists with previous technologies. Human's have an uncanny ability to adapt as their environment changes. Photoshop and 3D didn't destroy our brains and neither will this. Misinformation and the such have never needed AI to be effective. Those prey upon people's already existing biases and thoughts.
The time where this becomes normal and these alarmists become the fringe crazies ranting about the end of civilization cannot come fast enough.
I think long term the primary use case for AI generated video is people creating AI generated video for themselves to watch as consumers, rather than passing off AI generated work as their own.
I would not mind if I could go to ChatGPT and say: "Make me a 15 minute video about the history of gold mining in the Byzantine Empire", and it makes a mediocre soulless video I can half pay attention to while working.
If I see a 15 minute video on youtube about it and I find out after starting to watch it that it was AI generated, it sends me into a blind rage that makes me want to delete the internet, though.
Don't give me AI content unless I explicitly ask for it!
I agree that it feels like a bait and switch on YouTube. I expect to see user made videos there. Regardless of how much effort was put into it. I think a policy where these AI videos could be flagged as such would help a ton. Would not be an easy task though for sure.
The endgame is to eliminate legacy support options. Dedicated phone lines for activation costs money. The overwhelming majority of people using Windows 11 have access to some form/time of internet.
This is also just for activation which is not required to use Windows 11. I don't understand the extreme reactions to this. This isn't 2001 anymore.
Why would you take a working system and replace it with one that introduces an entirely new set of bugs and issues that needs to be ironed out? Who benefits in that scenario beside support getting paid by the hour?
It's almost flipped how the US and Europe have dealt with threats. The US has a long history of organized hate groups having the run of things. I don't Europe has experienced anything like the KKK for as long. However Europe is not far removed from fascist and authoritarian regimes. So things are more fresh in the minds of citizens and they are more likely to fight them. However when attacked through another method it subverts that and allows tacit approval from the public while their neighborhoods are transformed for the worse.
reply