TankovayaDiviziya comments on California police stumped after trying to ticket driverless car for illegal U-turn

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (27 children)

You know, we should re-assess many assumptions in light of emerging technologies. Even the conceptual value of labour is becoming more and more obsolete as AI and automation comes. We need a new Marx in relation to data as leverage to demand social equity, as in advocate for universal basic income/utility. Tech barons stole our data to train AI and automation, it's only right we bear fruit from our personal information.

permalink

fedilink

source

hideshow 27 child comments

[+] badgermurphy@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (27 children)

[deleted]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 27 child comments

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

That sounds concerning, but how is it different from regular taxes to collect & distribute the funds?

I mean, besides the obvious push from them to reduce taxes to 0% as they already do in the States.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[+] badgermurphy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

[deleted]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago

Not sure it's even possible to achieve being "completely free of corruption from moneyed lobbying", but at least getting to a system where the legislature or whoever has the power and the will (if not absolute mandate) to continually evaluate the situation and combat corruption (sanctioning, suspending, or expelling violators; penalizing lobbyists who don't follow the rules; amending the rules as needed to keep ahead of the problems).

There's just not enough real consequences for any of these people failing to live up to the standards we should expect of them.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

load more comments (-1 replies)

[–] Aeao@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (23 children)

Well if my choices are

A) live in a tyrannical oligarchy where a few powerful people hold all the power and don’t value me at all

B) live in a tyrannical oligarchy where a few powerful people hold all the power and don’t value me at all but I have money for food…

Man that’s a tough choice. I’ll go with B

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 23 child comments

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (21 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 21 child comments

[–] Aeao@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (20 children)

Really? Because you’re living in that false dilemma and and humans always have lived in that false dilemma.

So it’s not all that false

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 20 child comments

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (19 children)

If you only present 2 options then it is a false dilemma.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 19 child comments

[–] Aeao@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (18 children)

The sky is blue. True or false?

Is Chicago in America or not?

Are palm trees a tree , yes or no?

You need to revisit the dictionary. Not every a or b choice is a false dilemma.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 18 child comments

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (17 children)

Dude, you don't even know the difference between a decision and a question.

And, just for fun.

The sky is transparent

Chicago is in Kwekwe

Palm trees are a grass.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 17 child comments

[–] Aeao@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (9 children)

Look buddy, if you want to make an argument that my joke I made is a false dilemma… by all means go ahead, the person before you already pushed that point with logic. I disagreed but at least that’s a conversation.

You dropped a Wikipedia link and bounced.

Then you respond just now with answers to my 2 choice questions ENTIRELY WRONG and the sad part is you looked up answers and still got them wrong while missing I specifically picked 2 that I thought were funny. The sky is translucent not blue. Palm trees aren’t trees.

It’s like every step you take is another pit-fall while you argue against my jokes. Get it together dude.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 9 child comments

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (8 children)

You started all this with a false binary argument. It is a low hand way of forcing your opinion on someone and I linked to Wikipedia because everyone should be able to spot it.

I'm carrying on the conversation because it's hilarious how bad you are at arguing. You try to give examples of binary decisions and end up asking questions that are ambiguous. I'm dying to see what comes next.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 8 child comments

[–] Aeao@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (7 children)

I started this conversation with a sarcastic illustrative point to illuminate my view point. I very directly didn’t not ask anyone else to chose ANYTHING.

I said essentially “I see this, I choose that”

Which is my opinions illustrated thru over simplification.

That’s not me forcing anyone into a bottleneck.

A rhetorical question I asked only myself. I guess you could say I’m entertaining a FD myself, maybe. You can’t say I’m throttling your ability to choose things. I didn’t ask you anything, I didn’t present you with any options.

I’m myself am not “dying to see” what comes next. I replied to you because I’m bored and I’m right. That’s all.

It is funny to me you can’t see how clearly wrong you are on things. Do you want a YouTube video explaining the differences between transparent, translucent, and opaque? There are many available. Just let me know.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (6 children)

I said essentially “I see this, I choose that”

You gave only 2 options to chose from which falsely represented the situation.

I succinctly pointed this out. You got angry and are now suffering from Logorrhea.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] Aeao@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

I gave two options to myself then answered. I never asked you anything.
lol I’m not angry at all just bored. Thank you for the complement though. Yes I’m a salesman and a damn good one. I’ve never had someone describe me as Loquacious, but it’s a rarely used word. I knew it though if that was a test.

Anyway you are clearly balls deep in your histrionics… or maybe you just suffer from HPD in general…

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

I gave two options to myself then answered. I never asked you anything.

Yes. This is exactly what a false binary is. You presented a situation where more than 2 possibilities exist to put forward a false narrative.

I’ve never had someone describe me as Loquacious,

You still haven't. I'm implying you have written Diarrhea.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] Aeao@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago* (2 children)

Want to know something funny?

My last reply I wrote to was from an ambulance. I was being rushed to the er because I was dying. See I’ve been so violently sick that I hadn’t been able to keep water down for 3 days. I actively dying.

I got bored in the 20 min ambulance ride to Brownsville so decided to brows Lemmy.

I can show you the doctors paperwork if you want proof but my point is :

No, I have never been angry or mad at you. I’m just having a conversation about something that interests me. That’s litterly all. I don’t think you’re stupid I just disagree with you. You’re free to disagree with me. That’s perfectly fine.

Don’t take it so personally and buy a dictionary lol

Edit: that would also explain many of my mistakes while we talked. I was half delirious it’s impressive I made coherent speech at all! Lol

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

Our recent conversation aside, I hope you are back on liquids and are now recovering.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Aeao@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago*

I lived.

As for our conversation: believe me I know I’m a sarcastic asshole but I promise I don’t mean anything by it. That’s just how I talk.

I enjoyed our conversation. I prefer to talk to people who don’t agree with me. It opens the mind. I never much liked circle jerks lol.

Seriously that bug I got… a lot of people in the hospital also had. So make sure to keep washing your hands and keep distance from people. You don’t want to catch it bro. It was very painful lol I’ve been bitten by vipers, leg turned black and couldn’t walk… that was less painful than this lol keep safe bro.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] Aeao@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If that’s the way you want to see it. Good luck with those many other options that aren’t really there.

I know you believe “no there’s a third option of riding fluffy unicorns into the sunset!”

No there’s isn’t. That has never been option.

As for the word my loquacious I guess I just mixed that while speed reading. I’m not really paying all that much attention to you. I’m not angry just bored.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] Aeao@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (6 children)

The sky isn’t transparent it’s translucent giving it a blue color. Revisit the dictionary.

Chicago is in America. There is also other chicagos in other places but YES Chicago is in America much like Paris is in France and another one is in Texas.

Palm trees aren’t grass. They are closer to grass than a tree. They aren’t trees.

Dictionary. Buy one.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago* (5 children)

Wait until night. Is the sky blue?
You can be in chicago and not in America.
Apart from their size, palm trees are nothing like trees.
These questions have absolutely no relationship with the topic of false dilemmas.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] Aeao@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

yes. Now it’s dark blue. The sky isn’t transparent. It isn’t clear. It’s translucent which scatters light and blurs it.
that wasn’t the question. Is Chicago in America? Yes. Are there Chicago’s not in America ? Also yes.
so the answer would be “false” they are not trees. They arent technically grass either just closer to grass. The answer remains the same. Palm trees aren’t trees.
do you really doubt I can give hundreds more direct examples.

You have exactly 2 options. You have a decision to make. You can keep chatting with me or stop chatting with me. Choose. Option a or option b.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

do you really doubt I can give hundreds more direct examples.

Read it. It is not about asking questions with binary answers.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] Aeao@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

Dude… I buy the new versions of both Websters and Oxford dictionary every time the release a new version lol. I do both in case I’m arguing with someone from London about the word “evening”.

I’m profoundly boring. However like you said I’m very good at talking so it doesn’t sound so bad.

My point is I don’t need to look at Wikipedia or look anything up. I know what it means in America and in the UK. I know the slight deference between the us and uk definitions.

I’m not a bad ass, but if you want to argue semantics… boy you’re going to lose fast. You can’t be. I might be wrong about my opinions but I know the limits of the word.

At best you can say I offered myself a false situation, but again it was illustrative not literal.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

For example, one choice you are missing is that you don't have to live in a tyrannical oligarchy.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Aeao@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago*

That technically true but we always kind do live in a tyrannical oligarchy . It’s kinda always been that way.

So to be clear I understand what and why you are saying. I totally get that.

My choice wasn’t suppose to be taken at face value. It was me expressing the simple fact “Is it an option to not be under an oligarchy? Because I can’t find any place here or in the past that wasn’t a tyrannical oligarchy.

That’s why I said what I said. I understand the point you’re making I just don’t agree.

I’d compare it to

Boss: be at work on Saturday or get fired. What’s your choice?

Employee: that’s a false dillima because I could chose instead to be promoted to your boss

Boss: that’s not going to happen.

Of course there is technically a third option. Quit. But quitting because you’re about to get will be written as “fired “ in the paperwork.

Other options? Yes an infinite amount. But those options aren’t really feasible.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[+] badgermurphy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

[deleted]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Aeao@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago*

And that worked extremely well exclusively for white men in that great society you mentioned. It leaves out “lessers” living in that society. The ones who struggled to scrape by because their homes were redlined and valueless and they just took down your neighborhood to build another toll road.

The fact is that perfect time was only perfect for those in the chosen class. Boo.

I think we can do better than that.

Go read “the power broker” good book.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

load more comments (-1 replies)

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

It's an understandable concern but IMO if people are made aware of the value of their personal information being used to advance information age, like people learned the value of their labour during the Industrial age, then we can leverage to demand UBI. We need to be compensated for eventually losing jobs to robots, and using our information that trained the AI doing the jobs they would replace us with.

And even if it's not compensation by UBI, there is universal basic services in which people are provided housing and utilities unconditionally. Carbon dividend could also be a source of income to fund UBI or UBS until we achieve net zero greenhouse emissions.