LinkedinLunatics

3318 readers

25 users here now

A place to post ridiculous posts from linkedIn.com

(Full transparency.. a mod for this sub happens to work there.. but that doesn't influence his moderation or laughter at a lot of posts.)

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

csm10495@sh.itjust.works

146

Everything about this comment is cursed (sopuli.xyz)

submitted 6 months ago by crmsnbleyd@sopuli.xyz to c/linkedinlunatics@sh.itjust.works

45 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] FfaerieOxide@kbin.social 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

No, just when I find it humorous.

You find dehumanizing others humorous? You should work on being less terrible.

And I’d take that bet ;)

Prove you never have and I'd pay you, otherwise I will forward you a list of charities you can send your loss to. sarcastic smiley

[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 0 points 6 months ago (2 children)

You find dehumanizing others humorous? You should work on being less terrible.

No, the dehumanizing part isn't the humorous part. I'm sorry if I offended you, most people I know personally would find it funny and not take offense. It was meant to be light-hearted, but maybe it didn't come off that way.

Prove you never have and I'd pay you, otherwise I will forward you a list of charities you can send your loss to.

Why is the entire burden of proof on me? Shouldn't you have to prove I've never called a real person an "NPC?"

[–] FfaerieOxide@kbin.social 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Why is the entire burden of proof on me? Shouldn’t you have to prove I’ve never called a real person an “NPC?”

No, I shouldn't. I never claimed it was a particularly fair bet. Probably should check the terms before accepting.

[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Check the terms? You're adding new terms after the agreement was made. I call shenanigans!

[–] FfaerieOxide@kbin.social 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I call shenanigans!

Perhaps, but they are cheeky and fun-loving.

[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago

[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

And the main point I was trying to make, which obviously got muddied by my misguided humor, is that we (in the US, at least) already classify corporations as "people," which is something I strongly disagree with.

I refuse to respect corporations like I respect human beings, and I don't think they deserve human rights or the influence they have over our government.

[–] FfaerieOxide@kbin.social 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I refuse to respect corporations like I respect human beings, and I don’t think they deserve human rights or the influence they have over our government.

I don't think corporations are people either. You and I agree on that.

I do think I was correct in my read of the OP screenshot as indicating a desire to own and profit of the labor of a "person"—a position which should be examined and the underpinnings of which roundly rejected.

At a base level it's the same underpinning that inform people's desire to be landlords.

[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago

I do think I was correct in my read of the OP screenshot as indicating a desire to own and profit of the labor of a "person"—a position which should be examined and the underpinnings of which roundly rejected

My mind went in a different direction when I read it. It made me think about the Citizens United ruling and how legal recognition (or lack of recognition) doesn't guide my moral compass. And practically speaking, I don't think AI would be legally recognized as a "person" unless it benefits the ruling class and widens the wealth gap.

I also disagree with your judgement. There are definitely red flags in the post, but I don't think it's fair to read between the lines and jump to conclusions based on one post. It could easily be a satire account.