Honestly fuck off with that. Perpetuating stereotypes is not 'great' just because it helps your point.

The other person also said they didn't look angry to them so that could be just me. His eyebrows are angled downward and I think that's what makes him look upset to me.

I feel like we are having a conversation so I won't just ignore, but I don't understand at all what you mean by this.

I don't. I did assume oop was a white guy and it seems I was wrong, but regardless of who posted you don't break down stereotypes by reinforcing them. If he's not being racist for the sake of it, then either he's being casually racist because it helps his point or he didn't double check if his genious takedown on stereotypes actually reinforces them.

If you were aware this was stereotyping why did you post it here?

This is not an image that just comes up if you search him. Oop chose to have this image instead of him in a suit with a kept beard.

Edit: also amplify which fucking point, that people with messy facial hair in headscarves are terrorists?

Edit 2: look at my bias with the messy part, sub in 'longer'

You're saying all oop wanted to do by picking an old photo where the man they label as a terrorist wears stereotypically terrorist clothes was to imply that looks don't determine who you are?

This is literally the 'colorblind' argument

Excuse my ignorance but last I heard they were explicitly not massacarring anyone or taking a strong stance in any way as to not get deposed before they were internally stable? And is the dictator part a jab at coming to power with a coup or is there something else?

Couldn't they frame this without the angry bearded Arab vs smiling white woman?

First aid trauma pose

Edit: found this funny poster for it:

Op please change the title as to not further fuel the misinformation. Arstechnica seems to enjoy burying the actual information 3 paragraphs in where they know nobody will read them and your embellishments aren't helping.

1. There's nothing anywhere that suggests the ai is "remote controlled".

2. Arstechnica suggests that humans have access to the data and as evidence they linked a site saying humans don't have access.

3. Ars seems to want us to think the red rectangles in the image are contradictory. They aren't as Gemini Apps can be individually turned off independent of Gemini Apps Activity (history) and vice versa. The forced 3 day activity storage doesn't enable the apps themselves.

4. Even the author of the article pointed out that it can be turned off

5. Ars cites Tuta's article selectively to make it sound like disabling gemini is either ineffective or complicated. Tuta itself is a privacy focused gmail alternative with vested interest to muddy the waters but their article is still somewhat better written than Ars'

Edit: Title when this comment was written for posterity:

there is a remote controlled ai agent on every google device that can not be turned off