I was responding with an anecdote to the comment that sometimes it's important to communicate concerns, even if it means being a killjoy. Didn't mean for it to sound like I was trying to equate the AI hat-dropper to potentially overdosing, just a recent occurrence that I was reminded of when I saw the parent comment.

Imagine walking (or in this case, standing around) on a sidewalk just going about your business. Then, imagine something drops on your head, literally out of the blue. In a city littered with scaffolding designed to prevent pedestrians being injured by stuff dropping from buildings. Further, imagine you are easily scared and/or have a weak heart. So, I think it's not a huge stretch to say that, with enough unlucky coincidences, this also might kill someone.

I think it'd almost certainly eventually kill someone with a pacemaker and a weak heart.

(Or maybe cause someone to take a sudden step away from the sidewalk)

(I wonder if the title is a bit clickbait and the hat dropper in fact tries out this new tech only on friends who are prepared already, not random strangers?)

if it kills someone you can always just say "it's just a prank bro"

It is opt-in. You have to “order” a hat.

Aha, now, on a 2nd look, I see this:

> Here a busy New Yorker can book a 5 minute time slot, pay for a hat, stand in a spot under my window for 3 seconds, have a hat put on their head, and get on with their extremely important, extemely busy day

Ok. And after all, such nice hats are a bit expensive I guess (since they also function as helicopters).

Skimmed the article the first time.

I don't think he was making that comparison. I think this he was more referring to the mentality of "you must be fun at parties" whenever someone speaks up with some concerns about an idea.

Thanks for getting where I was coming from, haha.

Another fucking twat. No one likes this.