El Pais paywall can be disabled via reader view in your web browser.

        • magic_lobster_party@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          In EU with their GDPR/cookie laws. I’m pretty sure hiding the declining of tracking or cookies behind a paywall is not supported under those laws.

          • brsrklf@jlai.lu
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            I wish. In the end it all depend on how individual countries interpret the EU law. In France it was decided that “either let us shit all over your privacy or pay a subscription” was okay and in the spirit of the law.

            It’s bullshit IMO, but lots of sites ran with it. So those I refuse to interact with now.

          • heavydust@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            It is very legal and common in France too. You’re free to decline as long as you’re a customer. You’re free to accept or not see the web site.

            • brsrklf@jlai.lu
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              We need search engines that hide those from results by default. Basically “walled garden-blocking”.

              They want to keep the door shut until you surrender your data? Fine. They don’t get to pollute your web if you refuse then.

      • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Think I’ve seen this twice now in the past couple years, but yeah it’s likely not compliant with the cookie law in EU

        • hubobes@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          This is perfectly legal, the law only says that the user must freely choose to allow the website to save said data. You can opt out here and not use that website.

    • fl42v@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Idk what’s the big deal, honestly. Remember the memes about yt premium, “I either give you my money, or my data, but not both”? Well, it’s kinda like that. The caveat is, their payment provider likely still collects data, and some info is saved on the backend anyways, but that’s another can of worms.

      • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Asshole design is asshole design. They’re essentially saying here that they’ll sell your data whatever you choose, opting out is not an option.

        Obviously there’s easy ways to bypass this but it’s not an excuse for them

        Edit: also, their “cookie (and data sharing ) policy”:

        Clicking on “accept cookies” you’re agreeing WAY more than implied

        • fl42v@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          To me it looks more like they’re saying they’ll monetize their work no matter what, tho. One way is through direct payments by those who consider their articles worth paying for, then they don’t need to sell userdata or show ads; the other way is selling userdata. Well, there’s also non-targeted advertising, but mb it doesn’t worth as much or something (and targeted ads already pay close to nothing from a single viewer, afaik).

          Where I personally draw the line is when such subscriptions still include ads (looking at you, “ad-free” disney+) or have unnecessarily large costs and so on. I mean, if they charge close to what they’re making with ads and selling data, we could get most websites ~tracker-free for probably a couple of bucks a month each. This, in turn, lessens the power of ad network owners, which again makes the web better. Although, mb I’m idealizing too much, idk.

  • Allero@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Most men are not much into the idea, either.

    Intimacy is something very human, something most people are not ready to trust a machine to do, even if it’s capable of visibly empathetic reactions.

    There is a desire to connect with another human being, not programmed to like you, but actually choosing you freely. It’s what people call “feeling it real”.

    Most folks I have seen pushing for robotic partners are incels craving at least some form of closeness - having something like this might be better than nothing.

    Also, dudes, let’s be real: would you put your dick into a machine much stronger than you? Something goes wrong and you don’t have your precious parts anymore.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Also, dudes, let’s be real: would you put your dick into a machine much stronger than you?

      Hell yes

      Something goes wrong and you don’t have your precious parts anymore.

      Oh, IDK why I interpreted it as like a buff robot lol. 👀

  • kemsat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I dunno, everyone was cool with the love story of Wanda & The Vision from the MCU. I guess fucking robots is not ok, but becoming emotionally attached to one is?

    • Tattorack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Except Vision isn’t a robot, he’s an android. Or maybe more than that; a synthetic life form. He is his own person, with his own wants and needs. He can feel and develop opinions on things. He’s not merely a computer with a personality algorithm.

      • kemsat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        He’s not something that was gestated or birthed, thus is not a person. You can say an android is different, but regardless he’s not human or living. He’s a fancy thinking robot. Wanda basically fell in love with an LLM with an attached vibrator.

    • GladiusB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I don’t think that’s a linear logic. We all know Vision is a robot. But we also know it’s a story about a robot that is played by a man. We are watching for the spectacle, not because we believed the story to be real.

      • T156@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Vision was also a robot with human-type consciousness and intelligence. We can, at least, nudge that into “funny-looking human” through suspension of disbelief.

        Our level of robots is nowhere near that.

        • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Exactly. The comic strip questionable content contains artificial intelligences with quirks, foibles, personalities, and a social understanding that they’re people too. In it people and ais have relationships and even marry. It’s no weirder than a human in a fantasy setting falling for an elf.

          In the real world these are fancy chatbots owned run by corporations. Anyways here’s a video about people falling in love with them, it’s more sad than anything

    • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      The love story in the movie “Her” is even more impressive. It’s impressive because it’s not even a robot, it’s just an AI voice and yet the love story is still compelling. And it also asks bigger questions, sure there’s the question of could a person fall in love with a machine, and is that ok? But it goes further to ask, if the machine is actually intelligent, what does the machine see in the humans? Do the machines actually still need the humans at all?

    • BoxOfFeet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’ve never seen the Wanda and Vision show, but I always imagine it being Sonny from the I Robot movie with Will Smith, and Wanda Sykes.

  • KomfortablesKissen@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I thought onlyfans was the cheap and easy desire “fast-food”-like product for women. Or instagram or whatever social media gives people the impression of being center stage. Not robots.

    • Echofox@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Humans are all different. It’s difficult to accurately generalize them. Some people like only fans, but for other people it does literally nothing for them.

      To each their own.

  • flemtone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    In this current age of western dating Sex Bots at least cut out all of the bullshit for many men and give you basic companionship with the perks of sex, which is a lot easier for some than dating.

  • kibiz0r@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    In these sexual relationships, availability and consent will always be taken for granted, something that’s never taken for granted in a sexual relationship with another human being.

    People could get used to interacting in a way in which the other person isn’t taken into account as much, meaning that sexual partners could be instrumentalized for the purpose of having sex. That is to say the ‘human-humanoid’ interaction could be transferred to the relationship between two human beings.

    Unfortunately, however, these advances aren’t being accompanied by deep reflections about the consequences that sex with robots can have.