I present two options. If my kid doesn’t pick one of those two options, either by not responding or by requesting a third thing, I’m picking one of the two options for him. And I’m always picking what he’s least likely to want.

If they’re exposing their LLM to the public, there’s a higher chance of it leaking training data to the public. You don’t know what they trained with, but there’s a chance it’s customer data. Sure they may not train with anything, but why assume they don’t? If they have an internal LLM that’s of lesser concern, because that LLM would probably only show them data those employees already have access to.

Bad stuff comes out about Trump all the time, and it bounces right off. People already know he’s awful, and half the country likes it that way.

Or knives.

I’m guessing the work travel involved merchandise they couldn’t put in a carryon, either due to size or other factors.

It’s more about them feeding it into an LLM which then decides to incorporate it in an answer to some random person.

“Okay, we’ve had a 40 year old president now. Time to switch back to someone pushing 70.”

What’s enshittified about them? I tried an ID.4 for a few days recently and it was quite nice. I also had a ride in a Model 3 and the oversized screen hit me in the knee. Also I don’t think the VW has overhyped self driving which tries to kill you, like Tesla does. So at first glance I’m leaning towards the VW if I was to buy a car right now. What did I miss?

AFAIK there’s like one Cybertruck in all of Norway, and it got snuck in through some loophole because it doesn’t meet vehicle standards.

Model Y is selling like hot cakes, though. Most likely because they’re getting cheaper due to nobody else wanting to buy them.

I’m not particularly interested in an exercise which is completely irrelevant to real-world scenarios. In the real world your choice would look more similar to my example, so that is the more relevant hypothetical.

If you have a skill set someone is offering $500k for, someone less shitty is going to be offering at least $400k. So you’re not giving up $500k, you’re giving up $100k or 20%. I’ve taken bigger pay cuts than that in exchange for increased job satisfaction.

I’d say the only difference is that when you “have a filter” you may reword the statement before uttering it, but when you self censor you omit the statement altogether.

It certainly doesn’t need to be incriminating. A lot of discourse about self censorship discusses how young people often don’t express their opinions online, because they don’t want to get into some drawn-out discussion which ultimately results in everyone still maintaining the same opinions. It’s a waste of time and not good for your mental health. In that scenario the self-censorship is not about avoiding incriminating yourself, but about not triggering some situation you don’t want to be in.

Everyone does, often unconsciously. You know nothing good will come out of mentioning something in present company, so you don’t.

You don’t bring up politics while that weird uncle is visiting for Thanksgiving. You don’t bring up stuff you know will upset your friend. You answer “I don’t know” when a cop asks you if you know why you got pulled over. There’s endless situations where you know it’s best not to say anything, and a few where you quickly learn not to say anything next time.

Life would be very difficult and cumbersome if you didn’t self-censor to at least some extent.

Looks more like misdirection for the sake of misdirection to me.

Yes, but it’s obviously done that way to make the numbers look more different at first glance

All over his Twitter? Pretty sure there were plenty of Dark Brandon memes, like the “just like we drew it up” tweet after the Super Bowl.

Someone did invent stackable blocks with four round pegs on them, but saying Lego stole the entire concept is like saying whoever invented the wheel stole the concept because they didn’t invent the circle. You have to allow for iterative design to some extent.

To your second point, you are right that they have got “enough credit”, considering that the patent is expired. This is how patents work: In exchange for sharing your idea with the world so it can be iterated upon, you get to keep exclusive rights to use it (which you can optionally license to others) for a limited time. So the patents expiring is literally the system saying they got their due.

That being said, they still can get brownie points in public opinion for coming up with all this, and the competition has done very little iteration on the concept as far as I can tell, beyond making cool designs with existing brick designs. But considering that the competition so far has mostly been playing catch-up, this may change. Also, considering the vastness and versatility of existing brick designs, there wasn’t much to iterate upon, so maybe set design is really where we’re going to see most of the movement.

It’s basically down to “name brand vs generics” now with the patent expired, and some people will prefer name brand stuff.

I get your point, although I’m not sure that’s a good example. I’d be very wary of anyone promising not to stab me out of the blue :-)

That being said, I’d be very surprised if Lego isn’t still doing largely the same things they did before, except they’re no longer publishing what they’re doing. For the Danish part of their operations I’m guessing most of it is mandated by local law anyway.

OK, I haven’t tried those. I am currently building the Pikachu from Mega Bloks with my young children, and they are having a noticeably harder time putting the pieces together than with similar complexity Lego sets. That being said, I love the design of the set, and the assembly instructions are arguably at least as good as Lego.

I have a hard time reading this thread as anything other than suggestions for boycotting Lego based on them having removed their DEI policy, while suggesting alternatives which never had one.

And they still deserve credit for having invented the concept and designed the bulk of the bricks. I don’t see how that changes at all based on whether they have a DEI policy. They obviously should lose any benefit from having a better DEI policy, since they no longer have one, but that doesn’t change anything else.