House pets. I’m talking about pets you keep in your house.

>not to compete against dogs (at what??)

At the same thing that cats, gerbils, and parrots compete with dogs for.

Images like this always make me wish that we'd have successfully bred smaller, thinner pigs. They could be such fun little dog competitors.

Elephant?!

It's beautiful as hell, but why are all the boats spinning?!

> Nevertheless, in capitalism people are free to create businesses run by "democratic" vote of its members.

Much the same way that you're free to go start your own "democratic" country.

>ommunal access to them has been tricky logistically, and currently somebody does need to own them to prevent chaos. However, AI and trustless networks could solve a lot of those menial and inefficient tasks. A public transportation network, that has trustless incentives to maintain and operate would be really cool to see I think.

Nothing stops a perfectly viable public transportation system that is all-encompassing from existing now except the utter lack of profit in running it.

>Ownership and money are closely tied.

Ownership of capital is the sign of success in our society. Money is the entity that acts as a go-between allowing for ease of pricing and exchange of different forms of capital. They are not "closely tied"; they are inseparable.

There's an argument to be had about ensuring that wealth producers (ie working people) be compensated equivalent to their participation, but more than that, a business has its own internal politics, and if we accept that any government should be democratic then it leaves open the question of "does a business ever govern its own affairs and actions" and therefore "should the business, as a minor sort of government, itself be democratized".

It wouldn't write any ridiculous articles for me about politicians because it considered them "offensive and disrespectful", but was perfectly fine with writing me an article about Elon Musk's plan to feed Mars rocks to kindergartners.

The dividing lines it draws are absolutely silly.

> What kind of moral bloatware are you worried about? Any examples?

Up until very recently, asking for a recipe using a meat not commonly eaten in the US -- even if it was commonly eaten in some other parts of the world (like horse) -- would elicit a scolding from ChatGPT for being "unethical", advice being given to switch to vegetarianism, and a vegan recipe would be given instead.

Now it just chides you for asking for something "unethical" and stops there, but it used to be so much worse.

This is the kind of moral bloatware people are worried about.

> What OpenAI has done with, for example, ChatGPT, is manually add filters to check the outputs to see if they seem offensive. Did they over-correct a bit? Maybe, but the LLM itself is unaffected.

It told me it wouldn't provide me a recipe for horse meat because that would be unethical. It's definitely a little over the top.

At least it's not demanding I eat vegan anymore.

My takeaway from this is that more environments need beavers reintroduced and not that more environs need logged.