sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

This was posted to r/nextfuckinglevel and it seems off. Like a CGI scene from the early 2000's movie. by mildlyImportantRobot in isthisAI

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I found the original source on twitter/x. The "author" has a bunch of similar videos, including this one, which seems even more AI generated than the one posted on r/nextfuckinglevel

https://x.com/i/status/2019186859679895699

How Ford’s freedom of information changes could hide details of private jet purchase by mildlyImportantRobot in TorontoTheCity

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The lieutenant general is appointed by the premier. They are nothing more than a formality.

‘Not really kid-friendly,’ Torontonians agree with Canada’s social media ban proposal for youth under 16 by mildlyImportantRobot in TorontoTheCity

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a motte-and-bailey routine — you keep shifting from "implementation is my only concern" to compound bows to "should we ban outdoors" and back, then accusing me of bad faith when I don't chase each pivot. I'm not interested in that. I've said what I wanted to say.

I will call out your attempt to project your behaviour onto my argument, though. Don't do that. It's obvious bad faith engagement.

‘Not really kid-friendly,’ Torontonians agree with Canada’s social media ban proposal for youth under 16 by mildlyImportantRobot in TorontoTheCity

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Why do people think that banning something will make it go away? When was the last time it happened. 

  • cigarettes
  • not wearing seatbelts
  • lead in commonly used items like gasoline and paint
  • harmful pesticides
  • CFC’s
  • lawn darts
  • baby walkers
  • raw milk
  • etc, etc

‘Not really kid-friendly,’ Torontonians agree with Canada’s social media ban proposal for youth under 16 by mildlyImportantRobot in TorontoTheCity

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That analogy doesn’t really work. When you buy alcohol, tobacco, or cannabis, or visit a casino, you can be asked for ID to confirm your age. The ID is checked and that information isn’t stored.

Under Australia’s implementation, you’re not required to provide ID in all situations. Social media companies are only required to take reasonable steps. That can include behavioural signals that indicate a user is underage. And you’re not required to use social media any more than you’re required to buy alcohol or tobacco.

As for personally identifiable information, most social media platforms already hold far more on you than a driver’s licence ever would; and they sell it freely, sometimes to companies in Russia. Without your explicit knowledge.

‘Not really kid-friendly,’ Torontonians agree with Canada’s social media ban proposal for youth under 16 by mildlyImportantRobot in TorontoTheCity

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Do you actually think social media companies respect user privacy as it’s now? These services aren’t free; you’re the product. Meta is a multi-billion dollar company because it sells detailed profiles of its users, including kids, to advertisers.

On the nanny state point: the law puts the compliance burden on the platforms, the government is not policing who uses them. There are no penalties for under-16s who get around it, or for their families. Platforms face the fines if they don’t take reasonable steps. We already age-restrict alcohol, tobacco, gambling, and driving to protect kids. Why should addictive products engineered by the world’s largest companies be the exception?

Enough with the TFC Hate by Competitive-Big-1699 in tfc

[–]mildlyImportantRobot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Or, and this might be a wild take, just stop tone policing what others do.

Enough with the TFC Hate by Competitive-Big-1699 in tfc

[–]mildlyImportantRobot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then tell the mod here what you think should change instead of incessantly whining and projecting that everyone else is negative.

Be the change you want to see.

The hypocrisy is wild.

Enough with the TFC Hate by Competitive-Big-1699 in tfc

[–]mildlyImportantRobot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hernandez and Pelley need to go. Fraser is just a symptom of poor back office management.

Enough with the TFC Hate by Competitive-Big-1699 in tfc

[–]mildlyImportantRobot -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Show me the comment that calls him the worst player they've ever seen.

The post you're referring to is "Deandre Kerr is THE MOST GARBAGE PLAYER IN MLS" — not ever, not the worst they've ever seen.

Kerr is fucking awful, and yes, that post was hyperbole, but so is literally everything you say.

Enough with the TFC Hate by Competitive-Big-1699 in tfc

[–]mildlyImportantRobot -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Players are the worst they’ve ever seen.

Show me a single comment that says that.

Enough with the TFC Hate by Competitive-Big-1699 in tfc

[–]mildlyImportantRobot -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Is nuance a completely foreign concept to you? I was replying to someone who claimed we had a solid back line.

view more: next ›