If it asked you 10 times, that's 10 chances for you to mis-click.

"Opt-in" is a lie when the user is harassed or tricked into "accepting".

This doesn't feel like it was LLM-written, if that's what you mean.

People need to start voting in politicians who will meaningfully punish corporations who don't.

More importantly people need to start voting out politicians who refuse to. It's easy to elect people because of things they promise, but its what they actually do that matters.

So not sure where you are from, but over here both main parties and almost all press and TV would viciously push back (and actually are trying to do it right now with another party).

The reason for it is very simple: big companies bribe politicians and.... buy ads in media.

"Nothing that Altman could say justifies violence against him."

Nothing, really?

I think people are aware that speech can be an act, and that some violent acts must be resisted with reciprocal violence. (That's why we have "incitement to violence" as a limitation on free speech, for instance.)

Are we at that point? Maybe not. But I think it's a poor imagination that says it can never happen.

Yeah that's my thought too. People, especially Americans (I am one) have this weird belief that violence never has any place, ever, at any time.

I'd argue that the unwillingness to commit violence in certain situations is actually a character flaw.

If someone threatens my child with physical violence, an unwillingness to commit violence on my child's behalf isn't better morality; it's cowardice.

All this to say, I agree that the violence against Sam Altman in this particular situation seems unnecessary and ultimately not helpful to anyone.

> [E]specially Americans (I am one) have this weird belief that violence never has any place, ever, at any time.

So why isn't there a huge opposition in the USA against the wars that the USA started (currently: Iran; before: Libya, Yemen, Syria, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan, ...).

The only famous exception of cultural impact I am aware of where there was a huge opposition against war in the USA was the Vietnam war.

There is?

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2026/03/25/americans-br...

I think Americans (and probably humans in general) have a distaste for local violence. Violence afar doesn't tickle the brain in the same way.

My ignorant take:

Media brought the horror of US casualties in Vietnam home in a mass and immediate way that didn't exist in prior conflicts. The novelty of that media combined with the casualty rates drove unpopularity. It made the violence feel more real.

Even if casualty rates in post-Vietnam conflicts were higher I'm not sure we'd see negative sentiment because media coverage of violence is so normalized now. Exposure to violence in media is no longer novel.

TV ads 20 years from now: "If you or a family member have suffered from Spandex Kidney, you may be entitled to compensation..."

What a goofy comment.

The article you're commenting on is about people who obviously would have wanted this disabled, but didn't have it disabled, presumably because they didn't know about this issue.

LLMs are nondeterministic.

I often get asked whether I'm a fellow employee.