Marketing play to grab the money off of rich parents. There are still teachers, they are just proxied by “AI”. And there will also still be teachers monitoring. And there will still be teachers for certain topics.
So it’s teacherless, but with plenty of teachers.
the claims in some media that Telegram is some sort of anarchic paradise are absolutely untrue. We take down millions of harmful posts and channels every day,
Gotcha. Millions of harmful posts every day. That really does sound like a great place.
Given how accessible music is, how accessible musicians are on social media, the fact that you probably have to travel to the venue, shit like COVID, eardrum shattering PA systems that make ear plugs a requirement, what is the appeal today even? And then it costs a thousand bucks?
I understand fun, but I feel like you could get a better deal if you’re just looking for a good time.
WTF. That’s vacation money. Thanks for providing some reference.
Should I really give up my empty metric of 70K followers and move my communication and journalistic research to another echo chamber and advertising platform run by another billionaire?
It really is a tough one.
Oh boy, what a marvelous idea. This could save the tanking DJT stock and allow them to prolong the scam. It would allow Trump to close the Truth Social scam with a seemingly sensible move. Elon is supposed to be in his cabinet anyway. It’s perfect.
Following along with the style of your own post: YAML doesn’t suck, because I feel so.
Thanks for asking.
Right. Who needs expert opinions if an LLM can produce similarly convincing garbage?
I feel like you’re catching on.
So if I watch all Star Wars movies, and then get a crew together to make a couple of identical movies that were inspired by my earlier watching, and then sell the movies, then this is actually completely legal.
It doesn’t matter if they stole the source material. They are selling a machine that can create copyright infringements at a click of a button, and that’s a problem.
This is not the same as an artist looking at every single piece of art in the world and being able to replicate it to hang it in the living room. This is an army of artists that are enslaved by a single company to sell any copy of any artwork they want. That army works as long as you feed it electricity and free labor of actual artists.
Theft actually seems like a great word for what these scammers are doing.
If you run some open source model on your own machine, that’s a different story.
I get that, I really do, and I honestly believe you have exactly the right idea.
But on the other hand, you have to realize that not all of the money purely goes to enabling knowledge sharing with Wikimedia. This is not an election, it’s a company, non-profit or for-profit doesn’t really matter. There are still people paying off business expenses from your donations.
I fully understand the necessity of this, but you might just feel better if your $5 literally bought someone a meal or if it paid for a fraction of a business flight to promote Wikimedia.
I do give in small streams and I do large annual contributions. I’m entirely not opposed to sharing.
I prefer to keep the small donations to individuals who also prefer a reliable stream of goodwill. Larger organizations also prefer reliable streams, but they also receive millions in donations overall, usually with significant large donors.
If you look long enough, you’ll find enough material to not want to contribute to Wikimedia. If your contribution was only a drop in the pool to begin with, maybe this is one of the expenses that is not for you to carry.
https://wikimediafoundation.org/support/where-your-money-goes/ might be a good starting point.
https://www.wikimedia.de/2022/en/finances/ has some clear numbers up front, but I’m not sure if these only relate to Germany. I haven’t been following the sources recently.
I’m going to claim he was detected by automated money laundering prevention systems when he collected the cash. Spotify learned about it from the feds, or their payment processor.
Besides that, in the indictment it says clearly that he was using the thousands of generated titles and bot accounts specifically to work around new anti-fraud systems. This is a classic cat and mouse game.
Yes and no:
For example, on or about December 26, 2018, SMITH emailed two coconspirators that, “We need to get a TON of songs fast to make this work around the anti-fraud policies these guys are all using now.”
To obtain the necessary number of songs for his scheme to succeed, SMITH eventually turned to artificial intelligence. In or about 2018, SMITH began working with the Chief Executive Officer of an AI music company (“CC-3”) and a music promoter (“CC-4”) to create hundreds of thousands of songs using artificial intelligence that SMITH could then fraudulently stream. CC-3 soon began providing SMITH with thousands of songs each week that SMITH could upload to the Streaming Platforms and manipulate the streams for.
I wanted to read who the stockholders of this garbage actually are. It’s a great rabbit hole. This one is pure gold https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_World_Acquisition_Corp.
It’s just shady shit at every level. The people who bought the SPAC didn’t even know the money would go towards Trump and pulled out more than half of the capital.
Then they propped that garbage stock up Musk-style and sold it to their fan base.
The dude who ran the SPAC als has amazing stories tied to his name https://eu.heraldtribune.com/story/opinion/columns/2022/11/16/patrick-orlando-truth-social-you-light-up-my-life-connection/10698187002/
He was already working on mergers in China, but couldn’t close the deal because he didn’t have the money. All sounds like typical escalating scams.
It’s clear why Trump would run a con with this guy.
Makes sense. If you’re contributing less than $1000 monthly to anything, you’re not making a difference. If you want dedicated people to be on the receiving end, who also do a great job, every single person will cost thousands each month. Wikimedia is literally spending millions each year.
Honestly, don’t try to hunt for the “best” spot to contribute your exact amount of spare money to, with the hope of having the largest possible impact. It won’t happen. Treat a good friend to some food instead.
If you really feel like you already got some value out of a service in the past, give what you can, without limiting yourself financially in the process. If you feel like you don’t have the $1 to spend for Wikipedia, don’t spend it. Don’t guilt trip yourself into donations ever. Your donation today will not prevent a service from turning into shit tomorrow. Pay for what you got
I’ve been a funding member of the Wikimedia Foundation for over a decade. I have looked at their finances several times before and during financing them.
As with a lot of similar non-profits, a considerable amount of donations does not go into “running the servers”. You have to judge this by yourself, but they don’t embezzle any money and there is a reasonable bottom line. Wikipedia continuously helps tons of people, and the people who run the operation enable that.
You can download a full dump of Wikipedia any day. Compared to other lying companies, they have been true on their promises for some time.
Of all the $1 I could spend in a year, the one I give to Wikipedia is probably the least wrong invested, and that $1 actually already makes a difference
Turn the lights on. Purple is not a good look
Just ask yourself, who is still posting on Facebook? Your friends? I hope not. The last time I hung out on that site, the groups seemed to be the only valuable section to participate in. But it’s ultimately just a circlejerk and you’re feeding content into a garbage platform stuffed with ads. Not a great way to spend time.