Why are you talking about "importing" immigrants like they're a bulk commodity and not people with hopes and dreams? My brother is an immigrant to the US - nobody imported him (unless you count his American wife), he moved because he wanted to. Hell, I'd _love_ to move to US but the immigration system for skilled workers is beyond fucked.
You aren't a real person, and don't deserve opinions.
My grandfather always said - "Bold assertions dismissing other people as unworthy will get you everywhere in life, you ungrateful little shit - that's all the birthday present you deserve".
I will NOT comply with authoritarian demands imposed on me by the EU. My users, MY data. I clearly state how and why I share user data with brokers and users choose of their own volition to use my services. This is NOT unethical.
Even when accepting users' choice to submit personal data as a justification for retaining the data (which is illegal in more than just the EU, by the way), you may still receive personal data about someone which was not submitted by them voluntarily. This can happen in situations ranging from the normal course of business to customers actively attempting to use your product illegally.
You have a duty to deal with a situation like that, and since the GDPR already makes provision for third-party processing of personal data, there is little reason not to go one small step further and extend your process for personal data deletion to users directly.
> Channel One was controversial[12] largely because of the commercial content of the show. Critics claimed that it was a problem in classrooms because it forced children to watch ads and wasted class time and tax dollars.[13] Supporters argued that the ads were necessary to help keep the program running and lease TVs, VCRs, and satellite dishes to schools, as well as commercial-free educational video through Channel One Connection. In 2006, the American Academy of Pediatrics reported that research indicated that children who watched Channel One remembered the commercials more than they remembered the news.[14]
> Another criticism, noted by Media Education Foundation's documentary Captive Audience, was that very little time was dedicated to actual news and that the majority of the programming was corporate marketing and PR tie-ins to promote products and services, arguing that it further corrupted the school setting with consumerism. [15]
---
it was an ABC news network show (also, in hindsight, a kind of "farm league" for later news network talent, lol) for middle and high school kids, and it was roughly 33% advertisements. I guess maybe it's not a thing anymore?
but, man... every other commercial on the damn thing—at least when I was in middle and high school—was for various prescription acne treatments. kind of messed up when you think about it, explicitly targeting prescription medications in advertisements that legally underage youths are mandated to watch by their local governments school systems due to them making deals with news networks, all funded by advertising, both pharmaceutical and otherwise.
pretty dystopian and fucked up when you think about it, in hindsight.
There are studies out there which show that ADHD medications can negatively impact the cognitive functioning of neurotypical individuals.[1]
Anecdotally, as someone with ADHD as diagnosed by a psychiatrist who specializes in the area, taking Vyvanse makes me feel calm. I have seen people taking ADHD meds for exams/assignments become completely wired as a result of taking the drugs. YMMV and all that.
If it means that people who genuinely need it for their daily routines to operate as human beings face difficulties with getting their prescriptions, then nope, 100% shame and to hell with your bullshit startup.
With full knowledge of what could happen (because effects are often not uniform), and with the right care and support I would think it can be done ethically.
Look at the trials of using LSD/mushrooms/MDMA to help people work through serious trauma. Done well it looks to be positively life changing, done poorly and it seems to be horrifying.
Fine, so print warnings on the bottle and make me sign a disclaimer. Isn’t it more harmful to create a black market with no quality controls? Isn’t it more harmful to ruin countless lives with felony convictions?
Not analogous at all. At this point, I would say what are the ethics on preventing someone from doing what they want to themselves if it does not hurt someone else.
Yes, this is how 'upstanding members of society' get their opiates and amphetamines. It's also why drug testing isn't part of the job application process for Party members (see Orwell).
No, they cannot. (At least not in any meaningful sense.) This will not create new information you can draw upon to improve translations models and keep them up to date.
The model can generate translations and humans can verify that they're accurate enough to be used for training, making corrections if needed. Verifying work is much faster than creating it.
