sheepdestroyer

It is designed to stream wirelessly from a powerful computer too

You don't need high IQ to enjoy reading or hikink, most people could and should decide to like it more.

I would not talk to my friends about the stuff I bounce on AI. My meanest brain dead ideas get a rebuke, and I fight back to test grounds. I'd rightly get shamed for inflicting such undeveloped trash on anyone.

4k is only expected to be 1080p + DLSS, it's really good enough for that class of HW

I don't want an apple blob I want to pick specific components and run linux

I play inverted mouse on every game because that was the default on Descent, my first 3D game. At least that's what I remember.

However this version uses mouse up/down to do up/down, and that seems so wrong. Can't play it :(

Once your data is out there it's too late. If the hypothetical country you live in - where freedom & due process is respected - suddenly has an authoritarian change of direction, you're done.

It's my understanding that, organically or under external influences, many democratic countries in EU are at the emerging risk of going full fascists. I see that in France, Le Pen & friends don't hide the fact that they'd make a new constitution.

Richest guy in the world has vowed to use his propaganda power to make this happen for the sake of cancelling the EU, fun times

I fail to see how this particular "anime girl" and the potential for clients seeing it, could make you think that's a fair request. That seems extremely ridiculous to me.

I don't. "safety" as it exists really feels like infantilization, condescention, hand holding and enforcement of American puritanism. It's insulting.

Safety should really just be a system prompt: "hey you potentially answer to kids, be PG13"

Unless someone is hurt you can believe what you want. Otherwise it's necessary to weight what's to be gained and lost by entertaining net negative stances on frivolous grounds; and why we should then chose to do so.

Sure, I am quite against all of them already:

The first one has been argued against quite nicely by Piketty, it's how you get plutocracy

The three other ones should not be treated as Rights since the concerned individual is no more, and they don't matter much anyway if coming against the rights of people (that means "living"). For instance collecting organs for the good of those who need, when evaluated, should trump any opposition on frivolous grounds.

I'm indead asking if the whole concept is not wrong and deeply harmful to societies

I'm unsure why dead people would have rights. Is that concept really a good thing?

You still at least need a recent kernel

No. Humans should follow the law, and if they have to be stuck behind a robot that does to do so themselves, so be it.

Not only in science. Even (or especially) in impartial journalism or public debate, there's no valid reason why any unfounded (thus illegitimate) opinions should get as much consideration as sound and researched arguments.