It’s a good thing we got rid of USAID. How else would be able to scrounge up the spare money needed? We’re already going without healthcare and education, often without food and housing. So glad we still had some fat to trim and are able to support this. I’d hate for that money to be going to food and medical aid for countries we exploited or god forbid, go to help people actually in America.
imprisoning children $200 billion
kickbacks to besties $150 billion
weapons for genocide $800 billion
REBRANDING $3,600
Grok AI gf integration $150 billion
Someone who is good at the economy please help me budget this. My wallet is drying
It’s unbelievable to me that R voters do not see how wasteful petty garbage like this is. They were “worried” about life saving medical aid sent to other countries, but apparently setting up Nazi style banners of their fuhrer is a great use of taxpayer money.
This is an translated excerpt from the article:
The man decided to download the files. Police told the man to stop this and delete the files. The man indicated that he would only stop and renounce it if he ‘would get something in return’. Therefore, the police have decided to arrest the man and confiscate his data carriers to secure the files again and prevent distribution.
If you are sent a download link, while you know you should get an upload link, it is clearly told not to download and choose to download the files anyway, then you may be guilty of computer breach. The recipient can reasonably assume that the download link and the files shared with it are not intended for him.
The police have no indication that the files are further distributed. The protocol surrounding a data breach is followed. Police are conducting further investigations.
It does not seem like a power imbalance allows them to just roll up and arrest him. It seems like they have a legal ability to ask him to remove the files and since he did not they have a legal right to charge him/confiscate the files. I generally don’t want to assume public sentiment, but I personally think it’s understandable that some government documents (those pertaining to open investigations) are subject to protections that other documents might not be. For what it’s worth, if someone sent me their digital information they wouldn’t have to ask me to delete it because I would not have saved it in the first place and I certainly would not have asked for payment to delete it if I somehow accidentally downloaded it.
Reddit had a lot of really friendly “femme leaning” communities. Especially the smaller ones. If you were only going to Reddit for nail painting and wedding inspiration it was actually really wholesome. Those communities tended to be 1) very well modded 2) “easy” to mod 3) not fun to troll. There’s a little grey area on if someone is offering good faith critique, but if you’ve commented twice and neither have been positive you lose the privilege to comment. It can create a bit of a hugbox, but it’s much preferred to the opposite.
I really like my experience with the fediverse so far, but I really miss the experience of those positive “femme” spaces. It’s a very different feeling and I haven’t gotten it from the fediverse yet. Not that we’re not empathetic, just that it’s a different space.
The wrong he did was the extortion. If you feel like people being extorted should not be able to charge people attempting to extort them because they created the conditions for extortion then I think we fundamentally disagree on how law and order should function. Doing something bad/illegal is wrong. Extorting someone for doing something bad/illegal is also wrong. I don’t think you should be able to blame someone for making it easy to extort them as a defense for extortion.
That’s a little unfair. If I leave my door open while I’m gone and someone comes in and makes copies of my personal documents I guess that’s somewhat my fault, but they did something they knew they shouldn’t have. The guy is basically extorting the police and asking for taxpayer money to delete information he was informed he should not have. It seems like he was notified and given time to comply but chose to demand money. I don’t know the exact content of the files, but there’s a lot of potential harm that can come from certain documents being public. I’m not pro police, but the guy seems to be clearly in the wrong here.
Is the idea that they’re somehow reviewing the code on their phone during their commute? Or are they just pushing to prod without even glancing at it? Why bother with the middle man. Just have the AI push it. What a stupid admission.
I used this library all the time. Glad to see they’re keeping the bar high. Extremely concerning that this happened, but the HN comments bring up a good point that the hit piece was probably not an autonomous decision by the AI. The human likely directed it to do that. That seems especially true when you see that a human later tried to make the same change and was pretty salty about it being rejected and their overall GitHub seems suspect. The best part about the whole thing in my opinion is that the “blog” the AI started has a copyright attribution to the AI. I know that’s just a thing blogs have, but it’s funny to see considering we all know AI cannot hold a copyright and the output cannot be copyrighted.
That’s… not a thing? A human cannot “replace the human aspects with pure OpenClaw.” What would that even mean? A human can take credit for things AI has done, but that doesn’t mean anything other than that they took credit for something. They’re not bootstrapping or a cyborg, just irresponsible.
Damn. Couldn’t be me. Maybe I’m a bad contributor (yes) but I will definitely pop in to fix something that’s bugging me and then never contribute again. I’m not adding new features though, so maybe my contributions are just never significant enough for me to feel any ownership of. I think it’s a lot to expect people to continue to contribute just because they did so once. That would potentially make it less likely people contribute when they can. I’m certainly not going to address an open ticket if it makes me responsible for rewriting the feature when people decide to port or refactor the whole project two years later.
When you do things right, people won’t be sure you’ve done anything at all.
But for real, it’s a dumb sport. All sports are dumb, but this one more so than most others for sure.
That’s in part why I think articles like this are so important. Catholics overall really have not been seen to care about anyone else being affected, so maybe this will reach them. Catholics are not getting sympathy from me, but I think this kind of article will help get them on our side if it’s at all possible.
Not sure the intention of your comment, but I think it’s good to have this out there. America is a pretty religious place and a lot of people still consider the clergy as emissaries of god. Being very clear about them being harassed by ICE might affect people’s perception of ICE when other people being harassed would not. I don’t think the priests think they are exempt, they are just trying to rally support from people who care about them more than their other community members.
Anyone who decries metoo as “cancel culture” is not a comrade in my book.
Incoming leftist infighting accusations.
I have a feeling that the government kidnapping members of their community and not being held accountable is actually not that unthinkable to a lot of indigenous people. I don’t want to speak for them, but the body of the article doesn’t really give the impression either so I feel like the title is a little insulting to their history.
I think people do recognize what the underlying issue is, but it’s hard to organize against “racism” or “capitalism” or anything else for that matter. Sure, you can march, but in reality if you march and then go back to your normal life having changed nothing, you will likely change nothing. Target for example had a drop in sales due to boycotts, and plenty of border towns are being hit by a drop in tourism.
If you want ire directed at the people telling the story, then it needs to be directed at capital. That’s what boycotts do. Sure, you can’t stop everyone from traveling, but if you have a friend wanting to see Yellowstone and they see social pressure to not travel to the US, maybe they’ll wait. If enough people do that then the tourism industry suffers and the surrounding industries as well. I do not want people to financially struggle, but unfortunately if no one changes their behavior then the world continues to get worse. I’m seeing that the EU is investing in EU tech infrastructure and that’s amazing. That’s what I want to see. Divest from the US so that other countries are not so able to be affected by US pressure.
I can’t speak for the person you’re responding to, but I can say that if I was out of the country I would not go to the US for most reasons people travel. I have family in red states, and I have just decided not to visit them or go to family events there. They don’t even agree with the state government, but moved there because it was fiscally convenient, they were not personally affected by the laws, and they don’t mind being surrounded by people that agree with those policies. At a certain point we all have to make our own choices, and I would rather not spend money in a red state. If people come for life saving treatment, or they would lose their income otherwise, I can see how they would make that decision, but I seriously question anyone coming for things not related to life and limb.
People should boycott the US whenever possible at this point. We were always bad, but we’re out and out fascist at this point. I wouldn’t visit Germany during the rise of Hitler, so I don’t know why I’d make excuses for the US. I don’t think it’s about thinking you personally will get deported, it’s about solidarity and geopolitics.
This was put out by a lobbying group that happens to be pro AI, just for everyone’s information.
I’d much prefer they embrace martyrdom than the murdering thing they’ve been doing instead.
I think it’s important to acknowledge that USAID was not a perfect organization. I have said as much before. Countries are often not doing that kind of thing for purely altruistic reasons, but evidence suggests that people were getting food and healthcare through them that they otherwise would not have received. You can argue the benefits of supplying that vs upskilling or local investing, but people are now lacking something they used to be able to count on USAID for. I think good could have come from something like that, and there just isn’t the political will to remake that where possibly it could be used for good. I understand people may feel like reform is impossible, but I think a lot of USAID work was doing something for people that we owe something to. More and better should have been done, but I don’t think dismantling it the way they did helped as much as it hurt.