notaigenerated
It's only morally just if this creation of theirs consumes EVERYONE, including corporations, and not just the working class and creators.
Banning reverse engineering (and any non-life-threatening use cases) is exactly the thing that prevents the emerging system to balance itself.
They create imbalance and it will backfire.
They didn't bother when it was a non-profit sponsored by Elon Musk.
Letting them do even more horrible lawlessness will only lead to worse outcomes.
Second of all, the "much smaller neighbour" is any European country to them. Ukraine is the biggest country on European continent if we include the occupied territory. And it's actually has the most capable armed forces military-wise. Russia took over 116k sq km of Ukraine. All three Baltic states are 175k sq km combined and they literally can't defend themselves in case USA decides to withdraw.
And last but not the least, Russia's war is irrational. It makes no sense from any rational viewpoint. So relying on common sense in this case is wrong. You need to understand russian ideology and Putin's specifically.
It's a matter of opinion and has nothing to do with "facts".
Most of the data on the internet is UGC, and most of the time it's VERY right-leaning. It was one of the reasons OpenAI was "afraid" to release GPT-2: because it produced results that people in Silicon Valley didn't like.
I remember when Microsoft released the first proto-LLM and users always steered to being a nazi.
That's why in normal countries public healthcare is a thing and it competes with the private healthcare sector, forcing it to offer relatively affordable premium services.
Is being forced to die for motherland vs have an option not to = "mostly" consistent? You're delusional.
My population suffers either way and losing a war to a dictatorship while being a dictatorship doesnt change much.
Ukraine doesn't have allies. If it did, they'd be at war with Russia too.
> Most people decided millennia ago that man and woman have different duties in war times
Guess what, their decisions weren't limited by war times. Men and women had different duties in family, in communities, in positions of power, etc. And they had different rights then too, btw.
> Why is it, that you have to bring up all these unrelated topics like patriarchy, privileges and nazism?
Dude, you have no idea what you're talking about.
This division of duties IS called a patriarchal system, where men lead and women follow. YOU are trying to defend it, not me.
> People tend to have an attachment to the place where they live or have been born or with the people they live with.
Is that the reason they fled the country and want to move elsewhere and are now forced to go back? Interesting logic.
> That is a privilege, no?
Yes, that is a privilege men don't have. That's inequality by definition.
> As i said, women have different responsibilities in wartime.
I don't see women being forced out back to Ukraine to their responsibilities, though. Do you?
> Or do you suggest to conscript women and send them to the front instead?
I suggest consistency. If they claim to aim for equality, that's the logical step. And not "instead" but along with men. If they think women should have different responsibilities, then please be consistent and force them to commit to their responsibilities (what are they though?).
I just like it when governments try to be consistent with their policies. Equal rights? That's great, but then why men all of a sudden have more duties? If they do, they should have more privileges then. That's consistent and honest.
Or, if you decide that men have duties that women don't, let's get back to the patriarchy and give the men the privileges they fight for (or have to fight for in case of a war).