One of the biggest accounts on X hosts one of the most listened to podcasts on Spotify/Apple and has a huge following that's grown exponentially since 2023. He's an active Holocaust denier, proud antisemite, and dined with the president and members of his cabinet on more than one occasion.
To say there's no growing movement towards Nazi and anti-Jewish ideologies is to be willfully ignorant of the world around you.
Twitter has over a billion users. You can find big accounts saying all sorts of inflammatory things.
What you are complaining about is that tweets which rile you up are not censored. But those days are basically over, so you may want to consider leaving twitter if you insist on a higher level of censorship than what twitter is giving you.
Of course if you already left twitter, and are still complaining merely about the existence of a business that doesn't censor to your taste, then I would recommend looking for other past times. Try baseball.
It seems to be more complicated (or unpredictable?) than that:
> In this study, rapid weight loss was associated with the loss of kidney function in males with normal weight, and with improvement of kidney function in overweight males.
> Our study showed that BMI and BMI change were not associated with eGFR change in females.
Taking continuing education credits to check a box for retaining professional licensure and educating yourself about emerging and novel concepts in your field are two vastly different things. If anything, CE helps professionals update their knowledge base regarding existing processes and procedures.
It's been interesting to watch some of Wynn-William's claims be vindicated by recent court decisions about the addictive and manipulative qualities of Meta and Google's products. She left the company in 2017, and along with her many other allegations about Facebook and their executive team, had a good amount of information in the book about the reasoning, rationale, and management decisions that led to allowing advertisers to hyper target "coveted" demographics of tweens and children (among other claims).
Facebook, according to Wynn-Williams, sold advertisers on the fact that they could target young girls who post and then remove selfies from their services in order to market to demographics who were likely experiencing depression and negative feelings about their body image.
> girls who post and then remove selfies from their services in order to market to demographics who were likely experiencing depression and negative feelings about their body image.
This is just pure evil, and I'm not using this as a metaphor, it is evil by definition. I wonder how do the people behind these decisions sleep at night? Don't they have kids of their own? How can they look at their kids' faces knowing that they've deliberately caused harm to some other kids?
If your first priority is judging the author then yes. If your first priority is judging the company, as it is with many people in this thread, then it is less so. In that case, it only suffices to ascertain the truth of the author's statements.
To take a more extreme example, if a mob hitman turned FBI informant blows the lid on the corruption within the FBI, if there is truth in their statements, then them having benefitted from the corruption they are exposing is frankly secondary to my primary focus in the matter.
Additionally that kind of public trust only works if you have a government operating under the constraints of a legal framework, and to a lesser extent, an ethical framework. When a government serves the whims of an individual and instead of the function of their office, shirking agreed upon laws, etc, then you no longer have a government serving the people.
Sure, that’s why I said "on its face." This administration is obviously very different than most.
I don’t think Anthropic is wrong to include that clause with this particular administration, and I doubt the administration is internally framing the issue the way I did rather than defaulting to simple authoritarian instincts.
But a more reasonable administration could raise the same concern, and I think I would agree with them.
I don't think it's reasonable to take something the government is supposed to be protecting (right to contract) and turn them into its biggest threat. That's not security, it's letting the night guard raid the museum.
> Of course, the reaction is wildly out of proportion. A normal response would just be to stop doing business with the company and move on. Labeling them a supply chain risk is an extreme response.
Google Glass failed because they made the user look like they were wearing a high tech computer on their face ala Dragon Ball Z. It looked odd. Meta and Snap learned from this, but it had nothing to do with smartphone cameras not being part of daily life.
The first iPhone was 2007. Google Glass came out in 2013
One thing I've noticed is a large difference between what's served on Facebook's desktop site and what's served on their mobile version. I don't use the app, I just log into facebook.com on my phone, but the mobile version is serving 100% more of this AI slop than on desktop.
I think it's obvious why given the way users interact with sites/apps on their devices vs on desktop (they want to make FB mobile as TikTok-like as possible), but it's really striking how much of Facebook on mobile is just a bunch of AI slop at this point. I see some creep in on desktop too, mostly within the Reels/Shorts section (same creators/videos on both platforms, that is), but to see my recommended feed content be so vastly different indicates a lot to me about how the algorithm interprets user behavior and a lot of Meta's thinking about mobile audiences.
EDIT: mind you I don't follow a single topic or favorite anything on the platform, the content being served/recommended to me is purely based (as far as I can tell) on gender/demographic info they know about me and user behavior.
Did they even end up launching and maintaining the project? Did things break and were they able to fix it properly? The amount of front-loaded fondness for this technology without any of the practical execution and follow up really bugs me.
It's like we all fell under the spell of a terminal endlessly printing output as some kind of measurement of progress.
To say there's no growing movement towards Nazi and anti-Jewish ideologies is to be willfully ignorant of the world around you.
reply