@jsonbecker Thanks for the thoughtful reply!

I may have a slightly different definition of trying out an opinion. I don't disagree that exploring possible perspectives should by all means be permitted. I just feel that it's helpful to distinguish "figuring out what my opinion is" from "trying out what other people would do if this would be my opinion". I think consent and disclosure are somewhat important here. By flagging things appropriately people know what to expect.

Speaking of expectations: I agree that both scion and rootstock can be the source of harm (to use a slightly weird metaphor). Being aware of there being harm in either doesn't excuse us to not care for the potential harm done by either, though, right?

The big question when it comes to shifts of society like you describe with your examples for me is always: How much can you actually do? My reflex is to say: Not much. Intentions are a lag measure. That doesn't mean we shouldn't support what we think is important to create the world we want to live in - even if it's only for our own sakes - and support the people and actions the seem to us necessary to make these things more likely, but I do think this stuff is merely necessary but not sufficient to change the course of the world at large. So we'll have to live within the world in which we live, warts and all.

This implies to me that what follows from your observations is no ownership of cause and effect but recognition of our collective limitations. I don't think that we make actual choices in that way as you hope.

@jsonbecker I guess you have a point there. As somebody who also was part of this (but more from the perspective of being critical of not including the aspect of power relations and track records into these reflections - or at least that was what I was thinking when commenting originally) it seems hard not to read this at least partly as vindictive, though. And I think it's a little early for that. I also suspect it's the "crickets" that spurred others to comment again critically (just like me, I admit).

@manton I feel bad that you felt bad, but that "Crickets" comment really does not help. People may not have engaged directly with you, but I don't see this as a resolved case now that the truth™ is out as you seem to.

Look for example here: That discussion doesn't sound like crickets to me.

@manton This is such a bad take. Why do this? You make me as a mb user look bad by association. I get that you're trying to say that it was wrong and trying to say that people are emotional about this. But what you're also saying - inadvertently perhaps - is that Altman (et. al.) didn't do it on purpose, because he's obsessed with the movie Her and therefore people should have not freaked out or, if anything, freaked out earlier since that voice was already out there for a while?

And what does it even mean to say that their account is not a total lie? Does it need to be a total lie?

Why protect a company and a CEO like this? I myself am using AI here and there and I think it is an interesting technology and probably here to stay (for better or worse), but there is no need for "both-side-sing" it here.