So I was in a very stereotypically chauvinist situation last week: Two colleagues and I took a customer (all 4 of us men) out for lunch after(/as part of) a sales call. After the waitress left to put in our orders, the customer made a pre-excuse and then joked something like
well that’s definitely putting a rack on a shelf.
I don’t remember how I reacted. I’m also not sure what I wish I had said.
I’m not the one you were replying to and haven’t read the comments you referenced but couldn’t let this stand unchallenged:
It’s not censorship when they’re removing posts by both sides.
Yes it is censorship, it could be censorship with reduced bias, it might even be appropriate censorship. But it is literally censorship to censor speech.
Oh yes, I forgot about how brake dust is burning towns to the ground because of extreme weather and inundating low lying regions with rising sea levels.
I can understand liking the idea of the cyber truck but its aesthetic is so different from convention that I think people need to see it in person to decide if they like it.
There are so many things in it that are different in ways that might be better it is hard for me to imagine it selling well.
Did nobody in this comment section read the video at all?
The only case mentioned by this video is a case where highschool students distributed (counterfeit) sexually explicit images of their classmates which had been generated by an AI model.
I don’t know if it meets the definition of CSAM because the events depicted in the images are fictional, but the subjects are real.
These children do exist, some have doubtlessly been traumatized by this. This crime has victims.