|
| ▲ | mediaman an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| The product is a service, and they agreed to a contract. Now they don't like the contract. Is your view that contracts with the government should be meaningless? That the government should be able to unilaterally, and without recourse, change any contract they previously agreed to for any reason, and the vendor should be forced at gunpoint to comply? If you do believe this, then what do you believe the second order effects will be when contracts with the government have no meaning? How will vendors to the government respond? Will this ultimately help or hinder the American government's efficacy? |
| |
| ▲ | danorama 43 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Seriously. Hegseth trying to play “I’m altering the deal. Pray I don’t alter it any further” just shows this gang’s total lack of comprehension of second-order effects. |
|
|
| ▲ | isodev an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > It's up to courts to decide what lawful use is No, it’s up to the government to create policy and legislation that outlines what is lawful or not and install mechanisms to monitor and regulate usage. The fact that an arm of the government wants to go YOLO mode is merely a symptom of the deeper problem that this government is currently not effectual. |
| |
| ▲ | grosswait an hour ago | parent [-] | | Do you have any insight that what they want to do is YOLO, as opposed something your sure you’ll disagree with? | | |
| ▲ | isodev an hour ago | parent [-] | | YOLO here refers to unsafe usage of LLMs. Your government is supposed to make legislation that protects all of its citizens, it’s not “what you agree with” game. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | mech422 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Terms of Service would like to have a word.... Not like limiting uses of products is anything new |
|
| ▲ | rpdillon an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Not really. Services are provided on terms acceptable to both parties. This isn't about what's legal, it's about the terms of the service agreement. |
|
| ▲ | toomuchtodo 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Providers are free who they choose to do business with, or not do business with. Are you arguing that the government should be able to compel a provider to allow their use when it’s well documented the government does not respect nor adhere to the rule of law? I think you misunderstand commerce and contract law. |
|
| ▲ | 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | Forgeties79 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Strange take |
|
| ▲ | bdangubic 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Amazing to read this. Hoping you are not an American… Reading this thread is like comrade after comrade! |
