>Outside of gay people, the rest is your projection: they are homogenous society, racial problems are nonexistent.

You do know that Chinese people do go to other countries and that we all can see how insanely racist they can be right?

In what universe does the US not have "meaningful private sphere"?

Meta, Google and co control all your private data. GDPR is a european thing not an american or chinese thing.

CIA/FBI have their own massive data centers (see snowden) inkl. their own older bigger palantr style software.

Elon Musk was able to connect a Starlink server to your data and no one cared. He and his Duche aeh sry doge baby boys were able to access and download all Social Security Numbers.

If someone knows were Putin and all the other world leaders are at any given moment, I would bet its USA first than China if even because i don't think China cares that much about it than USA does.

And everyone out of scope of this, lives probably in some rural USA town were no one cares for you at all anyway, but thats the same thing as in China.

>Isn't the US building mass detention camps right now for all the brown people there?

No, it is not, but the freedom of speech protections the US has (that China doesn't) allow for such commentary.

Good thing I'm in Europe and not governed by those.

And yes, they are-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_immigrant_detention_si...

If you are willing to be hyperbolic to this degree in the case of the US an equal description of China would make Nazi Germany blush.

Then what's the problem? Nobody needs it, nobody will use it, it will just die off.

Same thing with the water arguments, or pollution in general. It's not about those having any weight, it's about being against AI first and building arguments against it second.

...You think air conditioners are forbidden in Europe...?

Yes. Here in Hamburg you have to pay some useless consultant to come to your house and check that there's no other way to decrease the temperature before you are allowed to install one.

You are also not allowed to but your bicycle in the garage.

"It does X for you" is the point of many technologies. You still require knowledge to work around it.

Context helps immensely, for example. Think of what you can do that someone outside tech can't.

The “it does X for you” aspect of technology is not completely without its downsides, for various values of X.

For example, take “X” to be “walking”. Do we have the technology that allows us to pretty much never have to walk? Sure. As far as I am aware, though, we do not generally favour a lifestyle of being bound to a mobility aid by choice, and in fact we have found that not walking when able in the long run creates substantial well-being issues for a human. (Now, we have found ways to alleviate some of those issues for those who aren’t able, but clearly it is not sufficient because we still walk.)

The problem is exacerbated immensely as the value of X approaches something as fundamental to one’s humanity as “thinking”.

> "It does X for you" is the point of many technologies. You still require knowledge to work around it.

When running water replaced the need to pump water out of the ground yourself, were people urged to "learn faucets"? You kind of just need to twist a knob and water comes out, right?

Maybe there was an intermediary stage where running water was slightly more complicated and there were more steps to learn, but devoting time to learning those steps would have been a waste of time, since the end goal of the system was for it to function without much input.

Will you guys update the site if what OP talks about ends up taking effect? I guess that at that point the domain name would be a bit out of place.

Maybe, although I don't think a lot of blocks will happen about anything other than different kinds of football. Given their following in Spain and the market I'd expect much more rampant piracy on F1 or MotoGP much sooner than... golf? which likely has a very very niche following in comparison. Surprising they didn't puruse about either of both, maybe because of different rightholders in the middle.

Because the data it presents is not believable

If this is their rationale they should say so, so they can fade into obscurity as soon as possible and leave room for sensible people.