fear

I did. He assured me in more professional terms that they don't give a shit. I do a lot of business with them and have been a client in good standing since I became an adult. They apparently have nothing set up to retain customers who leave over this, which would indicate that hasn't been an issue for them. Or they might be banking on me not following through, but that just means they don't know me very well. When it comes time for me to make those changes to my policy, I'm gone.

Privacy has been beaten to a bloody pulp, but the fight doesn't need to be called yet. Don't give up, keep telling everyone you can. I know things are looking low right now, but every person you reach matters.

In the case of Zoom, an approach that could actually work is having every step of the solution already completed if you've got an employer trying to push Zoom on employees. Make sure you can clearly state here's the problem, here's why it's dangerous for the company, here's a great alternative, here's why it's safest for the company, and here's how you install it. Reach out to the IT dept if you're not the IT dept to get them on board. If the advice is coming from multiple employees, that will help your case.

If they want digital artwork, then it's safe to say they accept the typical digital tools and brushes, even if some of those could technically be using algorithms some would describe as rudimentary AI. An artist would have to be purposely obtuse not to understand the difference between the clone brush and telling Bing to draw them a dwarf.

Imagine getting caught and having your claim denied or being sued for insurance fraud. I'm happy to use ublock origin, but what you're describing is playing with fire. We need to make sure it never gets to this point in the first place by making it illegal for insurance companies to do this.

Okay, I get your point now. If all artists had your stance and felt this hobbled them, then I'd understand thinking Hasbro's decision is wrong. But not every artist agrees with you. This is reminiscent of the argument between digital and physical art, with digital artist's struggle to be seen as viable against oil painters and other physical media artists. Except digital isn't any better or worse, they're simply different mediums. You could argue pros and cons for both types, but in the end everyone is entitled to the medium they prefer. This includes AI assisted artwork. If someone prefers digital art but wants no AI influence, that's up to them since art is entirely subjective.

This is a perfectly valid direction for Hasbro to want to take, and they're the ones who get to make the call. Not every artist feels hobbled by being barred from AI tools, some artists prefer to avoid AI entirely. There are plenty of people who would happily accept these jobs.

That's not what Hasbro wants, though, and it's completely within their rights to have this stipulation for artwork that is tied to their brand. You sound offended by their decision, when their decision will likely result in more humans being employed and valued for their human contributions. Seems like a strange thing to have a problem with. No one is saying you can't make your own personal D&D art with AI tools.

Something needs to happen to clue in the average person about why this is such a problem. I don't know what that something is though. Continued breaches of privacy? The government and police continuing to make obvious use of the data they can easily buy from any of these companies? What is it going to take for people to care and for laws to be made to prevent more of this going forward?

I was talking to my insurance company the other day and they warned me that if I make any changes to my policy they'll drastically jack up my rate because of the changes in the economy. But I can bring it down a bit if I install their tracking software on my phone that can interface with my vehicle and send all of my driving data to them. It would tell them everywhere I ever go whenever I drive, my exact speed at any moment, braking habits, etc. Does anyone ever say yes to this? Do people realize that they could sift through everything you've ever done effortlessly with AI to find that one time in your life you came to a rolling stop at a deserted stop sign and claim you're a dangerous driver who doesn't follow the rules of the road in order to deny your claim?

Is there a chance in hell that one day this won't be a requirement just to have vehicle insurance? Why isn't everyone up in arms about their data being harvested and sold to the highest bidder? Why are there not laws being made against this kind of undemocratic, authoritarian control over people? I am so disappointed in my fellow man, both the ones guilty of the harvesting and everyone who couldn't be bothered to complain and put a stop to this.

Foot dick has a glossy NPC gaze, but the girl on the front left looks fun.

They probably know better than to eat their own product.

Don't give France any ideas.

J&J should have taken action years ago, they could have prevented so much suffering and death. This is a great article on the issue from back in 2020, explaining how J&J could still profit even if they only charged 25 cents per pill. Instead they charged several tens of thousands of dollars for a course of the medication, leaving 80% of people in the world who need treatment unable to access what might save their lives. It's unconscionable.

Thanks for speaking out and sharing. I'll do what little I can on my end and boycott this company until they do better. At this point I trust the no name brand over J&J anyways so it's an easy option.

My mind immediately went to Karen Wetterhahn. Usually it's just you, but sometimes it is mercury.