it’s funny. my kids are sweet and usually really polite. after an hour or two of unrestricted access to YouTube kids, they become unbearable selfish little fuckwads that yell and scream and kick.

so, we banned YouTube except for specific content we download and limited to 15 minutes once a week. now they’re nice sweet polite kids again.

YouTube is cancer to kids development. if you have problems with your kids, I’d recommend looking at how much screen time they get with YouTube or toxic games.

eat shit and maybe I’ll consider watching you eat more.

I am training my model on these 100,000 movies your honor.

the irony is that title was probably AI generated.

if you won’t tell my truth I’ll force you to acknowledge my truth.

nothing says abusive asshole more than this.

it’s a nonprofit he directly benefits from because it has his name on it. he directly benefits from it by using it as a way to sway political power. he directly benefits from it through financial gains paid through the organization.

the entire concept of the foundation is contingent on his financial success. something of which he is well known for destroying lives for.

so tell me, how many of those ruined lives were acceptable for the good that his charity does? how many more lives must be ruined for the good to continue to be acceptable? would you find it acceptable if your life was destroyed to continue the good his charity does? would you be willing to accept your life to be ruined or ended to support the continuation of his charity?

I don’t understand why you don’t see the obvious correlation between the two so I’ll over simplify it.

bad man makes bad money making people suffer. bad money makes good stuff happen under bad man name. bad man still bad man doing good stuff for bad reasons.

you sit and justify his actions by arguing he’s doing good things. I question if he’s doing good things just to do them or if they’re a byproduct of him “cleansing” his name. after all, bad men do bad things. Ever heard of Alfred Nobel?

I didn’t compare them, but in your mind you understood it that way.

I used Hitler as an example, an extreme one, but still an example of “the ends justify the means”.

could have use any number of examples, but I went with one I thought everyone could relate to. clearly I miscalculated the selfishness of modern day philosophies.

He is not a good person. But the foundation has done some good work.

seems like a justification to me dude. you’re literally justifying his indiscretions, that you even call out, by saying the charity he heads “has done some good work”.

And I sure as hell don’t white wash Bill Gates. You don’t get to that level of wealth and dominance without cracking skulls and ruining lives every step of the way.

I don’t know if you’re actually being misleading or confusing by accident but calling attention to it being “nuanced” is a clear indicator that your argument supports that the “ends justify the means”.

the ends don’t justify the means.

Hitler experimented on hundreds of thousands of Jews and the medical world benefited from it greatly.

does that mean you’re going to nuance the Nazi regime because they “did some good”?

no amount of good is worth the ounce of evil used to make it.

edit: if the ends justify the means, where do you draw the line? how many lives must suffer in order for the goal to be achieved? 1 life? 10? 1 million?

and to those of you claiming Godwin’s law, I used it as an example. I don’t think Bill Gates is Hitler, I never even said anything like that. we could easily use the Tuskegee Airmen and the US Department of Health. How many of those families had to suffer to make the ends justified in your opinion.

IMO none. there is no amount of loss of life that is acceptance for any means. life is precious and unique and deserves to be protected.

edit 2: I didn’t realize humanity sold out their morals and ethics for the “greater good”. my mistake thinking we were better than that. sorry.

yeah and with AI we can eat shit that tastes like pumpkin pie.

no it isn’t. yours might be, but not mine.

cloudflare is a symptom of the corporatization of the internet.

they goals are counter to the goals of the internet to be a distributed repository of communities and information.

CF not only unifies all the communications through their services, which can cause worldwide outages (happens literally every year), but collects and tracks users across all other network requests.

CF is anti-privacy and pro-corporate interests.

it’s about time someone fuckin did it.

it’s a shame it’s Russia though.

hope you proofread those emails, least you send part of a romance novel that the AI hallucinated into being.

it’s great. eventually small businesses will need to rely on FOSS solutions because the costs are counter prohibitive on a sliding scale that’s heavy towards VC funded companies.

honestly if I was a VC right now, I’d be cozying up to the major PAAS/SAAS vendors and investing with them to drive small businesses to make the choice to get VC or go out of business because it’s too costly to compete and operate.

Thankfully I’m not a soulless husk.

but that’s not my first look as the title states.

concepts that have been whipped up in Photoshop aren’t “first looks”

if you sell something for $1 at 10am your $1 still buys $1 at 10pm.

in crypto, it’s easily manipulated, and that’s by design. it’s a scam because the only people who have that control are the wealthy.

If I sell 1BT worth of something at 10am, it could be worth 2BT at 10pm, but it could also be worth .1BT equally.

the purpose of a Fiat currency is economic supremacy that is backed by the governing body and the economy that uses it.

tell me, what governing body or economy is crypto backed by?