I placed this info elsewhere. Refinery building in Tennessee, query in Canada. At least that’s one company shooting to use the silicon for EV batteries. Makes sense because GM built their battery plant here in Tennessee as well. So they could likely ship within the state once refined. (Trump’s tarrifs on Canada obviously being an issue)

We are building the refinery in Tennessee, and the Quary is in Canada. 1 company is Sonova Global.

So naturally the Tariffs against Canada will be us making our local refinery pay more to import materials from their own company’s query across the border

Russia doesn’t own the land they put troops on? What are you talking about.

Why do you think that? That’s an aggressive claim. I don’t use it, but thats because it isn’t my idea of fun, obviously many like it. Data collection happens everywhere, are you referring to kids eating tide pods or something?

Agreed, I don’t get the stock market. I know how to invest in it but how can someone say it has value if in theory the stock can plummet while the business thrives, and the business can turn to absolute shit and the stock can thrive. Like right now Tesla’s stock should be dropping. It’s vehicles lost a large portion of buyers, sales were down in the first and second quarter of 2024, people say they may have finally been up in Q3 of 2024 compared to 2023, while “experts” are saying sales are slowing, and market competition is increasing on all sides, so future profits are in jeopardy, yet the stock is at the highest it has ever been.

They wouldn’t though would they. They would invest it in something else, as they already chose not to use that money for spending. (Unless they are using a visa card to spend that money). So that investment likely would be stashing it in a mattress, a bank, the stock market, collectors items, property or such. All having varying degrees of help/hurt to our economy.

Hell maybe they’d just bet it all on NFL games on Sunday. We don’t know what they would do with it. But we know they already chose not to spend it.

Most of this agrees with what you said because I thought you said they’d spend it at first before invest. I just don’t see the big deal about it. It’s just legalized gambling, I wouldn’t recommend anyone invest it it long term, but then again… Anyone who did so far made a lot of money, haha (this only applys to the major coins, the tiny ones like penny stocks are volatile as hell)

Edit: oh I’ve got an example. Baseball cards or what not. Someone can put 10 grand in baseball cards, and they could go up, could go down, but ultimately are worth nothing, just like Crypto. Why aren’t people just as mad at the people buying collectors items?

… They said the populous of Lemmy was more scrutinizing of privacy than other platforms. He never said anything about the people using meta or Google. I’m not sure people here are even reading what others are saying.

To me it comes like this. If China won’t allow a Chinese owned app to be used in China, it gives other countries reason to worry about it. Meta and Google can be controlled by the U.S. government and are allowed within the nation they are owned in.

Is it a good thing they collect so much data, no. But this law has nothing to do with privacy, and everything to do with the flow of usable data and who controls that.

Throw in that Tik Tok is banned in China, so it won’t be a national security risk for them to sell it, just profit and then have to invest that money into other forms

Tik Tok likely isn’t going anywhere, they’ll sell to someone able to keep it up and running. The Tik Tok allowed in China isn’t the same one, so they don’t have to worry about data being pulled from their citizens.

I think we need to make laws pertaining to the use and usage of the term by businesses. There is nothing intelligent about language models. Most of what AI is being used for in businesses is more “Automated Instructions” than anything intelligent.

Laws need to dictate that companies MUST have reasonable ability to get to a human representative and that they are legally responsible for their responses.

It’s fine to set up automated systems to assist people within companies, as the majority of issues people have can be solved through automated processes.

User: “I need access to this network share”

LLM: Okay submit this form: Link to network share access request form.

LLM: Can I further assist?

User submits form specifying what the network path location, radio buttons for read/ read, write permissions, and reason for needing access.

Form sends approve/deny button to owner of that specific network share in an email.

Approver clicks approve, and the user is added to the active directory group required, and receives an email back stating they have been added and they should log out and log back in so their active directory groups update group policies.

Time taken by users: 5 minutes Many companies have so many requests coming in that stuff like this often doesn’t get to the approving parties and completed for weeks.

But if you set up an LLM inside your company non external facing that locates forms and processes but cannot access user data or permissions it can take the workload of managing 60,000 users down by a significant amount.

(I’m sure there are a million other uses that could be legitimate, but that’s just a quick one off the top of my head)

So it disappearing would have 0 effect, and it disappearing would help the economy, don’t conflict?

All stashing of currency is bad for the economy. If you put dollars in a mattress it is bad for the economy. I like that people automatically downvoted after, not even knowing what it was you deleted, haha

It’s good you dropped the last part, because it disagreed with the first part.

Yeah, a dollar and a crypto currency has no difference but reputation now. It isn’t backed by gold. They are both worthless gambles. The odds of variance is all your saying is different… Which is just reputation really

All money is ious? If you walk up to me and try to hand me money and I don’t want it… it’s worth nothing.

Find me a case of another person being charged with purchasing a gun while being addicted to a drug. Or better yet tens of thousands. You might find someone arrested for attempting to buy a gun while on drugs, but none that reviewed their past logs and tried to find out they were possibly addicted at the time of a purchase of a gun.

It was an investigation that I’ve never seen anywhere before. Any normal situation and a judge would have dismissed it completely as the person was not on drugs at the time of the charge, nor harmed/threatened anyone with the gun

Note: several judges stated such laws were unconstitutional during the years of the investigation, so any Republican supporting it must admit that States have the right to restrict any and all gun purchases for any and all reasons as the constitution states no such laws pertaining to addiction over lap and gun purchases… Or the law cannot support that case

Sidebar: whatever he did with taxes if it was unlawful and others do get charged with it, sure he should be charged

Can’t do that the best I can do is say they are all fully immune to prosecution.

Didn’t they look through records to figure out he may have been an addict around the time he bought a gun and that’s what he got charged for?

A law restricting access to gun purchases based on legislation not in the constitution. Thereby … exactly what judges have been trying to rule unconstitutional. So if the law is legitimate… Then states have full right to restrict gun purchases by any of their wants.

It’s all hypocritical shit.

Maybe I missundertand what you mean but doesn’t the other comment responding disagree?

It sounds like we need legislation that restricts government data being sold or cross referenced by private companies. I don’t see that happening though as people cower when it comes to the term saftey.

Soon as someone says it helps track down murderers and rapists, many people will back it. I imagine the NSA/FBI/CIA would want deals with the private sector such as Ring and such to acquire possible matches that fit criminals they haven’t found.

This creates an invasion of privacy, but many people would vote for it because they don’t value their privacy over such. I think the questions come back to how we can keep privacy while searches like that are bound to be supported/occur.

In theory acquisition of data from private sector to government I think will always pass by voters. Whether I agree or not, but writing legislation that blocks any information being shared/sold by government to private sector I believe we can get people to support.

They do. The alcohol dealers can only sell via licensed dealers and are punished for selling irresponsible products and to people irresponsibly. To drunk and you sell them more, you can get your licensed revoked, fined and possibly further penalties depending on where you are. If a you sell to a customer and they get drunk you are legally required to provide them with a safe means to get home most places. Whether that be providing a cab if necessary. Usually they will just call it for you, but often times that is them just dodging paying for it as they could be held liable for it. If a drunk driver leaves your establishment and kills someone, the establishment is also held at fault.

The people are told to drink responsibly.

(Not saying alcohol laws are perfect, but yes, they restrict irresponsible sales as they should restrict misinformation, and the company selling it is the one responsible)

Yes?

Marriam Webster: Ban - to prohibit especially by legal means