something tells me u wouldnt like it if people really did do deep research into what the police do

but they are still able to stop a person for jaywalking and search them for ‘looking nervous’ 

in order to misunderstand my comment to that extent, it is most likely intentional. so i’ll make this my last comment since i dont think you are interested in actually dialoguing and just want a punching bag to vent your frustrations on.

oh but i’m not attributing it to police misconduct though. i dont think we should be focused on police as individuals, but our policing system as a whole. whether a police action is legal or not does not make it acceptable or something that we would want to normalize

actually most or perhaps all of those things would be reduced, probably by a lot, if we addressed poverty or other societal issues . in particular, drug dealing and human trafficking largely involve victims who are already economically vulnerable; also you even admit in the comment itself that people do some of those…

it definitely is worrying if a game can be used for propaganda for negative purposes. i think it’s totally a useful thing to talk about. doesnt mean we’re in a jack thompson era

i dont even get your position here. your first paragraph indicates that you understand that the police are horrible and must face consequences for being racist murderers. your second paragraph isn’t really consistent with that

youre saying ‘this police game is showing policing in a good way and is how it should be, which is a good thing’

it’s better to defund the police actually. then we can use that money to fund things that actually reduce poverty and crime

that makes sense. i think what youre seeing is that most people dont have faith that issues with technologies will be resolved prior to adoption. which imo is perfectly fair on their part, because corporations run things right now and do not care whether people eat or are benefited in any way

if you agree that artists must be protected, then what will happen if they are not in fact protected? i hope that you will then understand why people are very upset in the current moment

agreed, which is exactly why we need socialism. this is a good opportunity to get people who are worried about the misuse of this technology to understand that this is a universal problem that demands a systemic answer. we need society set up in a way where technological progress does not threaten workers’ livelihoods.…

where we agree is that we need to have a society where technologies are actually used to improve our lives. what people rightly understand here is that this technology, like many others, will be used more to harm lives than to help them, because capitalists have all of the leverage.

this is kind of a tangent but the most messed up thing i saw in another comments thread was someone saying something like “hm, this ai art is a problem. but nfts could be a great way to solve it!” i was screaming when i read that

even if that happens, then there will be more competition among workers in that line of work. either way, capitalists gain more leverage and the rich get richer

your dad is correct about uber though, but i wont really get into it.

i get what you’re saying, and the art “works” in this game on an aesthetic level, but the reality is that it gives corporations leverage because they have an easier time not having to pay artists. the people who are upset are prioritizing this because they prioritize well-being of humans

if capitalists have their way, those things will literally never exist. they’ll let people die en masse before they let that happen (which is something they are already happy to do), they basically just have to be forced

your dismissal of the idea of people needing to eat kind of shows where your priorities lie

it honestly makes me happy that there are at least some people involved with the field who think the way you do. that gives me a little hope when it comes to this issue