• 0 Posts
  • 11 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: October 20th, 2024

help-circle

  • Lets clarify this.

    Your principle is “The moment your opinion starts to dictate other people’s lives, it becomes invalid.”

    My opinion is “People should be prevented from polluting the rivers.”

    You say the opinion isnt dictating anything, that its our right to have clean rivers that dictates the prohibition to polluting rivers. Ok, fair, as far as the legislation isnt based on the opinions of the legislators about what should be allowed and what shouldnt. If the opinions that “using AI to judge if a suspected murderer is guilty is not good” or “people should be able to disable all ‘AI assistant’ features on their smartphones and not have their data constantly scanned” become popular opinions, legislature may be passed and the consequence will dictate other people’s lives.

    I see what you mean though that using AI or not only concerns/affects the user. But thats not as true as it may seem.





  • Its the difference between maximum gayness and maximal gayness. Maximum gayness is being more gay, or at least as gay, as everybody else; while maximal gayness is not being less gay than anybody else (just as you put it). Two people with maximal gayness can have incomparable gaynessess, and thats the key thing about partial orderings, this possibility of incomparability. there could be many maximally gay people. they wouldnt be equally gay, but incomparably gay.




  • zeca@lemmy.eco.brtoSelfhosted@lemmy.worldLiquid Trees
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    ohh, thats why i got all these downvotes. youre right, i was trying to deny the original claim that trees would ruin any infrastructure we build around them. so, yes, was just saying that some infrastructure can be made compatible with trees, while most implemented infra is not.