derek

Dogs may be goobers but they aren't spuds and not acceptable foodstuffs either way. Regardless of breed. You monster.

tl;dr: you're paying for search either way. A reliable and secure open-source non-profit would be better but I'd rather be paying directly than use a "free" service which extracts an opaque and invariably sinister cost in perpetuity.

No one should have to pay for anything. We have enough excess that a gift economy is entirely feasible. Convincing folks of that, creating new systems to realize the possibility, and shifting from our existing systems, are all separate and difficult tasks.

In the current system I do think an independently run organization funded by the public (likely via taxes but possibly via private donation) does make sense though. In lieu of that, or something better, there is no useful internet search without payment. Using free search engines means either someone else eats the cost (which may work for small/local communities but isn't scalable without massive public funding and/or taxes) or the cost is subsidized a la surveillance capitalism and advertising.

Using free services run for profit extracts a cost that may be difficult to measure but there is no doubt it exists. When for-profit companies obscure that cost I am compelled to assume it is because they estimate I would not be willing to pay the asking price for their services.

Adjust this relationship to the magnitude of entire societies enveloped within, and seemingly dependent on, those services and the choice to personally decouple from that paradigm is an incredibly attractive option. I think, if one has the means, it may be ethically compelling as well (but that's a different conversation).

That's a gross and inaccurate accusation by way of assumption.

It reinforces the "reputation farming super user" trope.

The irony of a post with that specific brand of ragebait on x getting cross-posted to lemmy by yet another Miisha alt is so thick it borders on parody.

To throw a hat in the rhetorical ring:

All Men is to All Cops what All People is to All Rapists.

Men and People are inherited categories. They cannot be categories of choice. Cops and Rapists are, inescapably, categories of choice. The comparison of Men to Police seems apt at a glance but undermines itself by way of category error. Then it alienates via demonization the very demographic it is ostensibly meant to sway.

I doubt most good faith interpretation of the phrase anyway because it is so well crafted as a thought terminating cliche. Such rhetoric is rarely the product of dialogue or ideals focused on alliance, progress or solidarity.

A more useful rhetorical twist would be re-wording "If a Nazi is sitting at the table, and ten others are sitting there chatting with him, you have eleven Nazis at the table." into something like "Sexual abuse is common because we think of 'rapist' as an exclusive label. It isn't though. If one person abuses another at a party, and ten others notice or even suspect abuse but say nothing, then there were eleven rapists at the party". That's clunky but I'm not going to take the time to wordsmith it right now and I'm sure the point is clear enough.

There's also a 'w', 'wee', and 'weed' in there so: Wee! Recursive writes!

This but unironically. What was once a marvel is now mundane.

Modern skyscrapers are built with base isolation and mass dampening to make them resistant to earthquakes. Have you seen recent cargo ships? Warehouses? They are great and awful in every sense of both words.

That's excellent! I'm with you and agree that we're the minority.

The center point of dialogue on this topic isn't about Google specifically though. It's addressing the rug pull of the internet we were sold on while it was being built, and enshittification more generally. Not merely its possibility or even inevitability within capitalism but that the enshittification of everything is being normalized while the internet the public built is being stripped for parts by robber-barons.

So much so that industries built around norms, and all of the labor and jobs within them, are being lost. Even setting ideals aside for a moment: the harm that brings to the lives of working class people is immense. A minor apocalypse with long-term consequences all for short-term gains for a scant few over a handful of financial quarters. The beast is eating itself in real-time.

Even for those who champion it the reality of the situation is sour at best.

Your guess is as good as mine. I can imagine low-effort workflows. They would still require set up / config. The functional return, as I understand it, is nil.

They are laboring under the delusion that modified spelling stymies the use of their writing as LLM training data.

It doesn't. But it does garner attention (which is, I suspect, the real reason for their behavior).

Irrelevant in the face of established cannon. If you're going to make an in-universe argument then you have to stay inside the magic circle while making it.

This is like arguing Star Trek wrap drives wouldn't work because our current understanding of physics means Alcubierre drives are impossible to operate. You're applying a real-world understanding to a fictional universe that has written that part of reality away (for whatever reason).

The only point such an argument makes is that the arguer is ignorant of the source material.

You don't understand because you're either not paying attention or because you're trolling.

Random would be output like this:

Ostrich maypole dandy ironic. Great cucumber zebra!

Or this:

fhsjarbskzkdbsjzb kOdbg zkakfiebwkl

Random would be a password generator. Random would be utter nonsense. Incoherent. That's not what LLMs produce.