I think from a Utilitarian approach, Bill Gates still falls into a net positive effect on the world. His foundation alone has saved millions of lives by nearly wiping out Polio and Guinea Worm, and severely reducing Polio. And you can try to argue that it isn't him personally doing these things, but the dedicated people working at his foundation, but it's his name on it, it's his money funding it, and if he didn't exist the foundation wouldn't exist.
But I get it. Not everyone is a Utilitarian, and he's done a lot of shitty things that are hard to overlook.
Ok, that's an excellent sentiment, but utterly worthless in the real world. People will buy what is available and what is cheap. A handful of people choosing to be conscious with what they purchase is a drop in the bucket compared to what the masses will do.
I get it. Convincing the people to not buy stuff that pollutes should be the easy route, but it's not. And unfortunately we don't live in the world of "it should be this way", we live in reality. And in reality, the only real way to stop pollution heavy products from being sold is to go after the companies making them directly. Boycotts alone will not work because, again, as long as the products are available and cheap, people will buy them; morals be damned.
No, but it is fair to downvote people that are too stupid to recognize clearly fake shit. If you honestly think this post is believable... fucking christ.... Do people not use their heads anymore
You don't think this is faked, or the prompt heavily massaged to give this response? You really just jumping straight to "yes, this is obviously real and evidence for why AI is bad"?
About as effective as writing a bill saying war is banned.