I have a phone in my house that is bordering on ten years, I believe. Still useable.

I have another that is reaching six years old.

The one I’m personally using currently is reaching three and will replace one of those I previously mentioned.

I intend to get a de-googled phone soon and expect that to last at least eight years.

If you can, look for used Lenovo Thinkpads. Those machines are extremely compatible with Linux, out of the box, have good hardware profiles and, if used, can be sources really cheap and are very easily repairable.

I have two Thinkpads running Debian and the machines are brilliant.

No and I don’t think I’ve writen nothing that hinted in that sense.

What I tried to convey is that a good part of what is holding back women to achieve equality are other women and that is unreasonable to me.

I don’t know.

My concern was always about showing respect to others, regardless of gender. I want for others what I want for myself.

I grew up surrounded by womens and, as a kid, I heard horrible stories about men behaviour but also heard countless dismissals from women to women about those same male behaviours.

As a teen, I became so concerned of my existence as a man, I went so deep into neutral and non threatning territory I had girls telling me I was being flirted with because otherwise I wouldn’t notice nor correspond. I was quick to point out bad attitude/behaviour from guys towards girls as well, which did not make me popular with my peers.

As an adult, I started working under the supervision of women. No concern, no friction. I did became extremely aware how women would easily create and maintain terrible and damaging relations between them, for futile reasons. Even today, where I work at, where the majority of responsability roles are women, the way even polite conversations are held are laced with tension.

I reached a point where I act in accordance to my conciousness. I loathe disrespect, I get revolted by hearing anyone talk less of others. And I am learning to call others on their words and actions, regardless of gender.

I do recognize a lot of violence, of all kinds, is still enacted upon women because they are women, solely, but I am also aware a good deal is still dismissed and even abided by other women.

The paradox has a lot to it and is mostly misunderstood.

I know of a case where an assault victim got a special device that relayed the proximity of their atacker starting from 3000 meters.

It was paired with the ankle bracelet and it only beeped proximity. No location. If a certain range was breeched, it would relay instantly to authorities, which are mandated to call the bracelet carrier imediatly. No answer/range reduction, immediate victim call/visit/collection.

I’d go for the best dog there is, the Azores Cattle Dog.

Well rounded for guard work, defense, herding and hunting, both on sight and track by scent. Loyal to the death and relentless fighters when push comes to shove. Love the outdoors but will gladly take a comfy spot inside.

I’d also work on taming birds. Corvids, if available, but any song bird is a good investment. Song birds going silent is a good warning sign something is wrong nearby.

If boars are available, having them patrol around my perimeter would be a plus. The animals are fiercely territorial and will attack if cornered or feeling threatened.

How do you know? Honestly, how can you claim a given author will relay to a meat grinder the effort of compilling a work they will sign and be responsible for?

One added curiosity from me: at what point has the colective surrender of independent thought and action been signed and by whom?

And a final question but feel free to skip this: do you rely completely on LLMs to complete your daily life tasks or are you still able of doing things by yourself?

Thank you.

What?

You have the right to express your opinion as you may please but you’re not entitled to have me respect it nor respect you for it, but I digress.

This isn’t Reddit, sadly, because otherwise I’d give you gold for that comment.

By that logic, when all human labour - and I do mean all of it, with no exception - is no longer necessary, thus no income can be earned by any part, how will people survive? I expect them to be, at least, entitled to move out of the way and silently and peacefully disappear.

It is not an analog, in any measurement.

We are talking about a technology that been prompted, since its inception, as the leap that would render human work unnecessary - which is false under many measurements.

When that failed, it was then repackaged as the technology that would enable any person to do anything: write a book, a song, create the new Mona Lisa, write any program they needed or wanted, etc. And again, it failed.

Any major development was always geared towards solving a concrete, tangible, problem. For AI, every proponent for it is trying to find problems to fix with it.

I don’t care about the promises of AI. I care about the cost of it, now and future. It’s not a hand full of niche applications that are going to impress me. Put it towards research, make it truly useful, in the hands of people capable of forcing it to produce results and audit and validate them. It is not a toy, it is not something that can replace human beings in any measurement, it is not something people should be relegating their autonomy and individuality to, which is happening as we are having this conversation.

No need to reply to this. I’m out. I don’t care for any arguments in defence of AI and it’s potential. I’ve made my choice. Keep to yours.

Have a great one. See you around.

Congratulations. Enjoy it.

It is. It really is. At any point on any other endeavour, someone said it was enough and the costs did not justify the results. Not with this. So, it really is hard to understand.

Pass. Haven’t learn before, not interested in do it now. And if by some reason I wished to do it, I’d grab a few books on it.

The AI is a consummer of resources we can not easily dispense that returns nothing of objective and equivalent value.

Fresh words, no quotes.

More palatable now?

That is a false equivalence.

The looms, the automated treshers, the tractor, whatever machine designed to a fullfil a task that displaced human labour wasn’t designed with the objective to render humans useless. There were periods of transition when people hurt, needlessly, if I may say so, but new occupations emerged.

This is not the same.

For the first time, we are faced with a technology that feeds off human achievement to be built and next states it can dispense and completely replace what enabled it to be put together to start. While consuming resources we can not afford to waste and returning nothing of value.

A tool built through nefarious means and consuming resources it should never had chanelled into it.

Then, taking from your words, if the information these machines are working is by default outdated, why insist in feeding it with more and more and expect different outcomes?

Makes no sense to begin with.

To summarize: something that is being created through highly destructive amd predatory means, by completely deranged people, is not evil.

I can’t disagree more. And to quote myself, again, today:

As it exists, as it was created, “AI” is evil. It consumes resources we can’t afford to waste and is currently supercharging our pollution indexes and creating what may be a catastrophic collapse of already very fragile and unbalanced social and economic realities. And because we are already into the sunken cost falacy fase, it will never be rewritten or rebuilt. Hopefully, it will collapse in such horrifying way it will create a cautionary tale, but we are not so lucky, so what we are left with is picking up the bits after it. This kind of system had to be developed inside laboratories, colleges, universities, research centers, to aid into very niche and specific fields of research, not made to be a mass consumption comodity as it is. But it was, unfortunately, not done that way.

I’m just going to quote myself, as I’m satisfied enough with the answer I wrote to another reply.

As it exists, as it was created, “AI” is evil. It consumes resources we can’t afford to waste and is currently supercharging our pollution indexes and creating what may be a catastrophic collapse of already very fragile and unbalanced social and economic realities. And because we are already into the sunken cost falacy fase, it will never be rewritten or rebuilt. Hopefully, it will collapse in such horrifying way it will create a cautionary tale, but we are not so lucky, so what we are left with is picking up the bits after it. This kind of system had to be developed inside laboratories, colleges, universities, research centers, to aid into very niche and specific fields of research, not made to be a mass consumption comodity as it is. But it was, unfortunately, not done that way.