Right, I see what you mean, so there'd be a power imbalance there. From my perspective, if drivers buddy-buddied with each other to that degree, customers would just flock back to Uber and the business would tank pretty fast. It would be more beneficial for the drivers to treat their customers well.
phonyphanty
joined 2 years ago
Haha, how are those quotes relevant? This just reads like nonsense to me
How come?
How come? :)
Aw man, that's kinda mean. But I sort of get where you're coming from. A company owns exclusive rights to the .sucks TLD, so I guess in a way they're profiting off of hatred. I just don't really think it's that big of a deal. Like, if I'm angry at something I'm not gonna buy a domain for it... Especially since these are so expensive. Barely anyone buys domains. Seems like it's more tailored to marketing campaigns than anything.
What do you mean by that?
It's a term for a third gender used by some Native Americans :)
That just makes it harder to read :( I think the original sentence is grammatically fine.
I agree with other commenters' definitions of sovereignty. In Australia there are competing sovereignties. An imperial one -- "Australia", conquest, absolute power. And an Indigenous one -- spiritual connection, ancestry, sacred ties. In each of these sovereignties, the word "sovereignty" has a different definition and is deployed for a different purpose.
Indigenous sovereignty existed for 60 millennia, and then the British stole the land and denied that sovereignty in place of their own. The Australian state has the means to enforce its own sovereignty through things like laws, police, prison, disenfranchisement, poverty, but Indigenous sovereignty still exists. This is a fact. If I stole something from you and claimed it as my own with a threat of violence, it'd still be yours, even after thousands of years.
Under Australian sovereignty, you're certainly a citizen. Under Indigenous sovereignty, it's more complicated, and from what I understand Indigenous people have a variety of perspectives. I haven't heard anyone use the term 'guest', but I have heard 'invader'. It's an uncomfortable label, but it's entirely reasonable given the colonial history of Australia. Others have more inviting perspectives on this conflict between sovereignties.
Here's an article about it if you're interested: https://www.smh.com.au/national/what-s-indigenous-sovereignty-and-can-a-voice-extinguish-it-20230113-p5ccdk.html
Curious about this, what makes it computationally expensive?
To be honest, that's pretty lame. It sounds like just because you feel weird about them calling you a guest, you won't accept their clear sovereignty in Australia.
How so? Personally I don't see AI watermarks as having the same adverse effect as malware.