As ridiculous as it sounds, this does work on a subset of the machines affected based on my experience of the last few hours. With other machines you can seemingly reboot endlessly with no effect.
I think the optics of this aren't great. You ask someone to copy their voice, they say no and then (maybe coincidentally) you release a voice designed to sound very similar. Legally this may well be fine but come on, didn't anyone think this might make them look bad?
Sure, but to me it looks bad from the other perspective too if this is made into a problem. A person's natural voice is their voice and some celebrity should NOT be able to dictate how it is used.
If I lived in a town run by the mafia and had a problem I'd probably go talk to the local Godfather and ask for his help. I'd do this despite not being in favour of organised crime in principle. I'm not sure this is hypocrisy, just recognising the local reality.
Your scenario leaves out the fact that before this went down, you loudly announced to all and sundry that you don't need the Godfather or his fuckin' rules, so you were gonna start your own town with blackjack and hookers. Then you went back to him asking for help once you got ripped off exactly like how everyone said you would.
If you don't acknowledge the flaws in your ideas, that's not really hypocrisy, but it is very dishonest.
Not really the same thing but I worked for an organisation which had as a policy that every single team meeting had to have diversity & equality as a recurring item for discussion. 95% of the time this just meant the meeting lead saying "So...diversity - anyone got anything to say?" and then we moved onto the next item after a short silence. But every once in a while someone would raise something that might not have otherwise been brought up. It's a very crude instrument but it probably did get people to think a little more in that direction and maybe led to a little more awareness overall. The other standing item was health and safety which had a similar outcome.
It likely wasn’t General Motors you worked at… but every GM meeting must start with a safety tip - or some DEI claim.
In the engineering meetings I can tell you which one happens. And in the executive meetings that certain people can’t wait to spend 5-10 min of probably $20,000 worth of a dozen executives time with their feelings on the matter.
I fondly remember a heated discussion about chainsaw safety techniques.
You're right of course but the thing is - it's not "Hello, how would you like to make millions" - It's "Hello, how are you?" followed by a period of building the person's trust. And then it's an incidental "Oh btw, did I mention I'm involved in this great investment club". At this point a gullible person is seeing this other person as their friend (or more, a lot of people are lonely). Wouldn't you share your investment strategy with your friend?
Yea I think that also needs to be part of The Talk with your elderly relatives, too: Random online people are not looking to make friends with you, no matter how friendly they seem, they are taking advantage of your loneliness. I can see how the conversation could be unpleasant and you need to be delicate and respectful when telling it.
First generation immigrants (in Europe) have higher birth rates than second generation immigrants despite being poorer. It's not just about costs - it's about cultural expectations.
I think if a handful of people had been prosecuted then it would still be an outrage but understandable. But this was hundreds of cases. I think the legal system has some responsibility for not maybe thinking "Huh, what are the chances of so many previously law abiding people all committing the same crime in the same time period?".
Looking at things in terms of ratios seems like an odd way of judging whether misinformation is a problem. If 0.5% of the sentences I say in a day are violent threats towards children that'd be a problem, right?
“Won’t you think of the children?” type questions are not very useful, imho.
In your case, no one (barring a few people employing child soldiers) think children are fair game to be hurt so the answer to your question is that yeah, 0.5% of statements which are violent threats to children is a problem.
Covid misinformation isn’t as clear cut - reasonable people asked about the lab leak theory while yet others asked why a vax was being rolled out without holding manufacturers liable for adverse outcomes.
We’ve had situations in the past when a new medicine caused children to be born with shortened arms and other birth defects. In this light, it is reasonable to wonder why we should trust a pharma company when they didn’t trust themselves.
But the linked post is not even about the correctness of misinformation - given something has been classified as misinformation, how often is it viewed compared to non-misinformation videos is what they’re trying to answer.
