Technology

hideshow 7 child comments

parent

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (6 children)

No. I was talking about the two faced nature of this platform.

I've admonished data centers the entire time in this exchange. Don't tell me what I wrote about. I know what I wrote about.

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (5 children)

Wage theft impacts millions of actual humans and you're whining about the rights you think a corporate owned tool of oppression has instead.

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago (4 children)

For the record, I do not support Al data centers. They could all burn down for all I care. If every LLM shut down tomorrow, nothing in my life would change. I consider Al data centers a blight on the environment, and many communities do not want them built in their areas.

You actually read what I said?

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)

They're getting built and the objections of the people are ignored.

Rule of law protects the inanimate toys of techbros.

It does not protect human workers.

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

I mean you're wrong. Literally everything you said is wrong.

First, the idea that AI data centers are simply being built while ignoring all public objections is factually incorrect. A substantial number of proposed AI data center projects have been delayed, scaled back, or canceled specifically because of community opposition, permitting challenges, environmental concerns, and political pushback. Public resistance is having a measurable impact.

Second, "the rule of law protects the inanimate toys of techbros" is just rhetoric. The rule of law protects property rights, contracts, and individuals. Whether it does so fairly in every case is a legitimate debate, and I agree that corporations often have disproportionate influence in American politics. But that's very different from claiming the law exists only to protect corporations or their assets.

Finally, I don't even know what you mean by "it does not protect human workers." Protect them from what? Wage theft? Unsafe working conditions? Wrongful termination? Union busting? There are entire bodies of labor law dedicated to protecting workers, even if you believe those protections are insufficient or poorly enforced. As written, your statement is so broad that it's impossible to evaluate because it doesn't identify what specific protection you think is missing.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

The rule of law protects property rights, contracts, and individuals.

On paper, sure. In practice, most individuals aren't protected.

Finally, I don’t even know what you mean by “it does not protect human workers.” Protect them from what? Wage theft? Unsafe working conditions? Wrongful termination? Union busting? There are entire bodies of labor law dedicated to protecting workers, even if you believe those protections are insufficient or poorly enforced.

Well, in that case our system is perfect and we should be concerned about the poor techbros' oppression tools. Lord knows you're concerned with absolutely nothing else.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago

So I literally just proved to you that consumer protections are working and provided three sources showing exactly how that's happening.

And what do you say? "Nuh-uh," then move on to make wild assertions that I only care about "techbros."

Look, man, if you want to be upset about something to boost your own self-worth, you do that. Keep making things up if it makes you feel better or superior. Just know that you're wrong, and you're finding validation on a platform that's little more than an echo chamber for bandwagon rhetoric.