I would argue the people in every case you just listed were far more aware of the reward of revolt, which is half the equation. All of those dictatorships had existed for less than 15 years before another revolution or similar event had taken place. The people remembered a better life.
North Korea has some of the most effective information control seen this century, and their government has held uninterrupted power spanning 50 years. They are arguably the single most extreme case in modern history of a population that is ill-equipped to revolt.
The people who live in DPRK are well-equipped to know what makes a happy and healthy life.
What a strangely intentional choice of words. I was talking about their awareness of how their government could/does treat them. You've changed the subject to their awareness of...happiness and health?
Part of living a happy life is not living in fear of your government. To deny that North Koreans live in fear of their government is to basically ignore all of the information we have from the people who lived there.
It seems like you assume there is a direct relationship between how brutal a dictatorship is and how often people revolt, but I don't see why that would be the case.
An important factor in how people resist their government is the risk/reward of doing so. Do they understand that revolt can create change? Do they fear for their lives?
My understanding is that in North Korea, it is very likely that speaking out against the government will result in years or decades of jail time. Information there is also tightly controlled, so people do not believe such action would be productive anyway. I think a person would not want to revolt given those conditions, even if they are not happy with their government.
Simply put, they do not know things can be better, and they wouldn't know how to make them better if they did.
The good news is this means many of the jobs AI is "taking" will probably come back when people realize it isn't actually as good as the hype implied
Yeah, this is a lame take.
If anything, especially in the modern movie industry, I see bigotry of high expectations.
Movies with good representation seem to be held to a higher standard, expected to compete with the best of the best in whatever genre the movie lives in.
These are early attempts by underrepresented groups to tell their stories. They should not be exempt from criticism, but I think it's very reasonable to cut them a bit of a break and be glad they exist at all. Quality always improves with time, practice, and more opportunity.
Funny to see that Nolan in real life, much like in the dialogue of his movies, says a lot of smart-sounding words while actually saying very little of substance.
It's unfortunate because the conversation about AI in movies is one of the few areas where there's actually some interesting things to say right now. Even though the progression of AI in the current moment may be overhyped, the precedents we set today may last for a long time.
It is important to talk about just how damaging to the movie industry it could be to allow AI to replace actors, writers, and other creatives.
Nolan just likes his dramatic stories a bit too much. He'd rather tell us a story about how we'll give nuclear codes to a rogue AI. I can't say 100% that will never happen, but I can say with confidence that it is not the kind of problem we need to be worrying about today. Our problems are much more subtle and strange.
My favorite color is green, and I've been arbitrarily favoring green candies my entire life. I have had like 2 bags of candy EVER that had more green than any other flavor. It is always like this. Too many green haters out there
I thought this was confusing so I checked, this movie never released in theaters. So maybe that's the cutoff
Love his smug face lol
The fuck they sell at forever 21 for $1.35? A toothpick?