You would think even the lowest paid employees performing routine labor at the company would be pulling in multiple 6-figure salaries. I wonder if that's the case?
> You would think even the lowest paid employees performing routine labor at the company would be pulling in multiple 6-figure salaries.
Why would you think that? Because of Musk's reputation for magnificence and generosity? Because rich gigantic companies don't care about keeping operating costs low? Or because janitors at SpaceX require special skills that can only be obtained by paying many multiples of the market rates for standard janitors?
This article doesn't address the title question for me. It starts off by implying some insight into whether or not our consciousness persists or simply dissolves into nothingness, but concludes with the same old trope about our bodies matter and energy being recycled into the universe. Our matter and energy are not our consciousness, the arrangement of our matter and energy is most likely our consciousness.
"I" was perfectly fine before I was born, and therefore I'm very certain "I" will be perfectly fine after I die. That's comforting to me when I periodically have an existential crisis.
Why are the after pictures modifying attributes that are not part of the cosmetic adjustment? For instance, in the 'after' images skin tones are more "tan" (less pale), eye shadow is more intense, in one scene the woman is smiling vs not. All of these subtle cues make it artificially look like the cosmetic adjustment is "better" - just like all of those junk weight loss, age reversal, and muscle building before/after ads.
I actually see the value in your idea, but it looks like it still needs work to be trustworthy.
Personally, I would only trust it after seeing several 'ground truth comparisons of predicted results compared to the actual photos of people who had the procedure done.
How do I know this entire thing isn't AI generated?
Why can't we just have a third party vetting service for true content, where the content is labeled with a serial number and URL, and I can just look it up on the third party service's site to confirm it's validity (and if the content has no serial number watermarked on it, then I just ignore it as false)???
To check on the basic facts you could have a look at the "related articles" in the YT video description. There you'll find an item from Bellingcat, a fairly well respected source. They state:
This joint investigation by Bellingcat, Der Spiegel, The Insider and La Repubblica, was conducted over the course of 10 months.
If don't trust Bellingcat and you want to dig further you contact Der Spiegel, et al, to see if they know anything about this. And follow up any other sources they mention. Of course, where do you stop? The more sources you check the harder it is to claim that each source is part of a wider conspiracy, but it's hard work. Given the track record of Bellingcat I'm inclined to believe they know what they are doing, but that's just my personal level of paranoia. YMMV.
> third party vetting service
You left out the "trustable" adjective, and that's the killer.
...Yeah, for the 10's of articles I actually read in a day (at least with cobcern about their validity) that amount of homework would probably blow up my screen time by 5X, and result in my divorce.
"You left out the "trustable" adjective, and that's the killer."
Agreed. If there were a simple 3rd party vetting service that currenlty trusted purveyor's of news used religiously, that in and of itself would allow me to trust said third party validator for other, perhaps non-mainstrem channels, and not trust thos who didn't use the 3rd party validator.
I'm just saying - there's a high demand for trust. One could argue that the currency of the forseable future is indeed "trust".
Trust is highly subjective. A lot of people trust certain "flagship" sources like The Times (UK), NY Times, BBC, RussiaToday, Aljazeera, Reuters, etc, but they can have wildly different viewpoints on a particular point of news, yet they are all "trusted" by large numbers of people.
I understand that you want there to be a single source of news/opinion that everyone agrees is trustable, and that would be desirable, but in this era and any foreseeable future that's like wanting world peace: very desirable but ultimately unachievable for a myriad of reasons.
Ha, so true. I'm a total scavenger. I always scan the ground closely when I'm walking. Oddly, for whatever reason, I'm either just looking for interesting things or specifically for diamonds. I've found 3 diamonds in my life just laying on the ground - only one of which was real:P It is a rush though. I could totally see myself metal detecting.
Metal detecting is awesome. You'll find all kinds of cool stuff in my experience. Everything from small screws and nails to larger screws and nails. Or even bolts.
It's like the options of things I find are limitless (as long as limitless is roughly 3 things).
You would think even the lowest paid employees performing routine labor at the company would be pulling in multiple 6-figure salaries. I wonder if that's the case?
reply