[-] dlrht@lemm.ee 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

It's pretty clear you dont watch long form video content, most of the time they're quite thoroughly written and well prepared. I haven't seen long form video content that actually is just pure rambling, they're pretty generally well structured. I don't even watch them typically but the effort that goes into them is above just rambling lol, and you can tell they were actually written and scripted... Almost resembling an essay.... How strange....

[-] dlrht@lemm.ee 8 points 6 months ago

Appreciate the honesty haha

[-] dlrht@lemm.ee 9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I have no idea why this meme caused you to say all of that, where does a lack of a niche community come into play with this meme? Just trying to understand

[-] dlrht@lemm.ee 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

No, it's pretty clear that this is a result of modern "AI"... key word filtering wouldn't push applicants mentioning basketball/baseball up and softball down, unless HR is explicitly being sexist and classiest/racist like that.

I mean, the problem has existed for sure before ML & AI was being used, but this is pretty clearly the result of an improperly advised/trained dataset which is very different from key word filtering. I don't think HR a decade ago was giving/deducting extra points on applicants for resumes for mentioning sports/hobbies irrelevant to the job

[-] dlrht@lemm.ee 7 points 7 months ago

That sounds more like an issue with that person not being open/receptive to her peers advice. And I think this is true for many people beyond the age of 24 as well

[-] dlrht@lemm.ee 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Uh, no. If you're just a kid at 24 according to OP, when do you stop being a kid? When OP arbitrarily says so now? Could've sworn legal age meant something like "when you're no longer a kid and can make your own decisions". I mean I agree, 24 year olds are basically kids and still have a lot of life experience to gain. But they're not actually children like you're weirdly implying I'm saying

[-] dlrht@lemm.ee 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I see/hear about marriages started at 30+ 40+ 50+ all the time that fail. I see people pivot careers and industries in the middle years of their life. People tastes change all the time as they get older. Let's not pretend that when your brain finishes developing you suddenly have life figured out/know exactly what you want

I generally agree that getting married before 24 is a pretty risky move and you have to have thought it through very carefully, but the argument that "you don't know what you want for the rest of your life" is not the reason why that is. It relates more to life experience/emotional capability/massive foresight. Marriage is more than just "wanting something for the rest of your life", it's a commitment, it's not just some eternal desire you may/may not have

[-] dlrht@lemm.ee 50 points 7 months ago

At what age are you supposed to know what you want for the rest of your life? You will never have an answer to that in any capacity, and not just in marriage. You evolve as a person, you'll never have a fixed desire for your whole life. And that's the great thing about marriage and relationships, they also evolve. And it's about who you want to try doing that with

[-] dlrht@lemm.ee 9 points 11 months ago

They don't develop any particularly incredible tech aside from the one their whole product is based around and enabled them to be an industry leader 🙈

[-] dlrht@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago

I don't act like cattle, so I'm gonna continue complaining 😃

[-] dlrht@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago

Makes sense, but yea it didn't really answer the overall question of "if it hits peak market penetration how will it avoid going the Google route" since google also started with the same premise. I suppose the answer is hope it doesn't become a monopoly

[-] dlrht@lemm.ee 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

This doesn't make any sense, who distributes/gives out rights tokens? And if they lose publishing rights, why would the new owner of the publishing rights care about the rights tokens they didn't sell?

Blockchain doesn't fix anything new here, there's no point in decentralizing the rights ownership, verifying ourselves as owners of the right to watch the media was never the issue here.

Getting companies to be willing to give out non revokable rights tokens is the issue, and no company wants to do that because it's not profitable for them. It's not a technological issue that blockchain is going to solve

view more: next ›

dlrht

joined 11 months ago