You think most people have Sunday bible groups?

Really? How many people around you have one of those?

Maybe he needs to think of better tests then lmao

I’d say you didn’t put enough work, I kind of agree with the other person. If you care, you show it in actions. Words are just words and are very easy to say. They don’t defeat fascism, they don’t hold a friendship. Actions do.

However I don’t think that was the issue here. It was a huge mismatch and it does sound like your views weren’t compatible. I don’t think it would have been fair to ask you to put in that effort if it doesn’t come to you naturally either.

But the reality is, without work relationships wither.

I’m not sure 'in runs on unpaid labor’s is the flex you think it is.

That’s just a cute way of writing ‘it runs on exploitation’

Why do you need a VPN? If authorities want to go after you they can figure out what you are doing from traffic pattern analysis, they don’t need to read the information being transmitted. If it’s about the letters provierss send sometimes, if they send you one, find a new provider, or worry about a VPN then.

All VPNs do is give you the illusion of being protected while taking your money. They will not deter a determined attacker or the authorities, not that torrenting would be a big deal anyways.

When it’s financially viable.

Yes. There is just as much prejudice and drama here as on Reddit. Just just different flavored

Can’t wait until Grok just parrots classified info.

A lot of people in this thread are equating consuming pirates material with distribution. This is not the same.

Sony has nothing to gain from going after you Joe Schmoe who plays illegal mp3s or cracked games. The reason they don’t have a lawsuit is not that Colombia doesn’t care, it’s that the company would have nothing to gain from enforcing the law and spending the resource required to bring charges against you, this is true in the US too. You might get a letter and your ISP might throw a fit if you torrent, by no rightsholder is going to spend money in court because you didn’t pay to play.

The moment you start distributing pirated material, the interest of the company changes, now they care about you harming their IP, reducing their profits, etc. Now you are at risk of a lawsuit.

Being in fucking Argentina on whatever won’t make a difference, if Sony wants to drag your ass to court, they will, in whatever country you are.

The same I think about people who can’t shut up about atheism. Fucking fanatics with nothing going on in their lives.

And they they wonder why their favorite tech isn’t more widely adopted.

No.

You aren’t looking for a country, you’re looking a dream.

They are sold for LLM training sets.

What? There’s naked yoga on YouTube, more NSFW than that?

The three answers say literally completely different things. Wtf? Lmao

Wtf is torrent

Don’t worry I had AI TL&DR it for you:

Summary of “The Reverse-Centaur’s Guide to Criticizing AI”

Cory Doctorow distinguishes between centaurs (humans assisted by machines) and reverse-centaurs (humans serving as appendages to machines). His core thesis: AI tools are marketed as centaur-making devices but deployed to create reverse-centaurs—workers subjected to algorithmic control and expected to catch machine errors while being blamed for failures.

The AI bubble exists primarily to maintain growth stock valuations. Once tech monopolies dominate their sectors, they face market reclassification from “growth” to “mature” stocks, triggering massive valuation drops. AI hype keeps investors convinced of continued expansion potential.

AI’s actual business model: Replace high-wage workers (coders, radiologists, illustrators) with AI systems that cannot actually perform those jobs, while retaining skeleton crews as “accountability sinks”—humans blamed when AI fails. This strategy reduces payroll while maintaining superficial human oversight.

Why expanding copyright won’t help creators: Despite 50 years of copyright expansion, creative workers earn less both absolutely and proportionally while media conglomerates profit enormously. New training-related copyrights would simply become contractual obligations to employers, not worker protections.

The effective counter-strategy: The U.S. Copyright Office’s position that AI-generated works cannot receive copyright protection undermines corporate incentives to replace human creators entirely. Combined with sectoral bargaining rights (allowing industry-wide worker negotiations), this creates material resistance to worker displacement.

On AI art specifically: Generative systems produce “eerie” outputs—superficially competent but communicatively hollow. They cannot transfer the “numinous, irreducible feeling” that defines art because they possess no intentionality beyond statistical word/pixel prediction.

The bubble will collapse, leaving behind useful commodity tools (transcription, image processing) while eliminating economically unsustainable foundation models. Effective criticism should target AI’s material drivers—the growth-stock imperative and labor displacement economics—not peripheral harms like deepfakes or “AI safety” concerns about sentience.

Wtf is this conversation, half of these replies read like AI slop.

If I pay you to do something and you don’t do it, I’ll aka for my money back. How is this a hard concept for you?