That’s a good way to use it. Like every technological evolution it comes with risks and downsides. But if you are aware of that and know how to use it, it can be a useful tool.
And as always, it only gets better over time. One day we will probably rely more heavily on such AI tools, so it’s a good idea to adapt quickly.

After reading through several of their comments and having engaged in a discussion with them myself, I get the impression that they don’t care about respectful and civilised discussions and I think it’s possible they are trolling. As they also resort to throwing insults around, evading questions and not really showing interest in conducting a line of arguments, it’s probably best to disengage.

See above.

Until I see something which resembles a civilised and respectful response, showing an interest in continuing a discussion about the initial topic, I will no longer engage with you.

We seem to have reached a point where our conversation is no longer productive. As I value respectful and constructive dialogue, continuing appears no longer beneficial. Thank you for sharing your perspective. I hope we can engage more positively in the future, so let me know if you feel interested at some point in the future. Take care.

No, did I make the impression?

I am just trying to understand you and have a civilised discussion with you.

That took a very uncivilised turn.

Why are you so angry?

I am absolutely with you on that one.

But I think it’s tied to how we do business and less a problem which is very specific to the movie industry. Or in other words: it’s our fucked up capitalism in action again.

The workhorses of such shows get almost neglected while the shiny poster people and producers get most of the share.

And that’s basically everywhere the case. CEOs, managers, superiors are making insanely more money than those who are contributing a lot of work. It’s an unfair system which is holding the movie industry tightly in its grip as well.

i don’t need to present an alternative to glueing yourself to things….

I’ve had this kind of talk a lot of times. And when it actually comes to “those alternatives”, which critics say activists should pursue instead, one common reaction is silence, as they are lacking ideas about those.
I’ll leave you with that.

the jury is not out on that…

As far as I know, it is. If there are new studies, which I don’t know of and which come to a clear conclusion, I’d be thankful if you could link them here.

and i don’t really care about your opinions pretending like you’ve read research about how effective gluing yourself to things it….

Well, that’s your decision. If you don’t believe in facts, then don’t. But then it’s not surprising if people call you out on that, if you don’t provide proof for your position.
If you’re interested – which you don’t seem to be – I’ll happily share the studies, historical examples, reports and surveys I’ve collected on that topic.

it’s honestly pretty fucking evil of you to promote it.

I didn’t promote it. Maybe you can explain what gave you the impression?

nobody should hurt themselves to spread your political message.

I agree that nobody should hurt themselves. Although I can understand if people see themselves driven to such measures out of desperation and/or in order to prevent worse.
Regarding that activist group “Letzte Generation”, I couldn’t find any reports about injuries due to glueing.

Also I wonder where you get the “your political message” from as I didn’t make any statement about my political stance on that.

Sure. But it’s still less.

You probably meant 1 / 0.

0 / 1 is 0.

You require more fuel to move compared to fuel consumption while running idle.

a. self-mangling is a good way to discourage sympathy or participation b. disrupting a bunch of random travelers, and actually endangering them […] not helpful in getting sympathy for the cause… just press coverage… which will be mostly negative. […]
it’s so fucking stupid and counter productive

The jury is still out on that. I’ve found research and surveys pointing in both directions. The positive and negative effects of such forms of protest are not sufficiently studied yet. Also historically, there are good examples for both.

Therefore, I wouldn’t judge yet.

actually endangering them because planes are in the air and need to land

From what I know about that activist group, they always ensure safety. On street blockages, they make room for ambulances, they also inform emergency services.
I haven’t looked it up for this case, but I can imagine, that they considered this.
I think, planes usually have enough fuel to land at another airport for such cases. There are emergency protocols for stuff like that anyway. So no one is really endagered here. Just inconvenienced.

c. there are a lot more direct ways to cause disruption, and a lot more sympathetic, less self-harming tactics to get press coverage

What do you have in mind?

e. did i mention it even fucks up the activists physically!!!

Not really though.
Despite that, every member knows the risk. They know what they are doing. They are not stupid and think about such protest actions thoroughly.

Or, you know, Russia could just get the fuck out of Ukraine and leve them in peace. Much better agreement imo.

How is it profitable?

I wonder whether it’s possible to fight wars without – ideally – having casaulties at all.

For example, sedating instead of killing. Afterwards prison camps or something like that. Admittedly, given the scale, it is financially and logistically a tremendous effort. But how much must a human life “be worth” in order to be spared?

There are other obvious issues like civil unrest, if the other party keeps killing soldiers of one’s own military.

Still, it’s better than to end lifes from my perspective. One side must be the bigger one.

We spend so much effort and resources into specialising how to kill each other. But we don’t use that resources for finding alternative ways.

If there are people who really want to kill each other, throw them together and leave the rest alone.

How is it a proxy war if it was russia which started it?

There is just that teeny tiny ethical problem of not paying the creators and distributors for something we enjoy. This becomes a practical problem as well. If they make less money, it’s likely that even more movies or series get killed or never even started.

Idk what to do.

Install an android emulator. Problem solved.

Start pirating again. Problem solved.

Make your own movies and shows. Problem solved.

Start a company, get rich, buy Netflix, problem solved.

Stop watching stuff, do something else. Problem solved.

Found a secret society, infiltrate politics worldwide, stir chaos and destruction, let the world burn and built a new Netflix from the world’s ashes where you still can download stuff. Problem solved.

See? It’s not that hard!

(In case it wasn’t clear, I am joking.)

Did you need to ask for any changes/ substitutions?

Waiter writes that down, forwards it to kitchen. That can be expected, imo. Kitchen doesn’t get your tip.

Did you have an allergy they had to accommodate?

Lol, “thank you for not killing me, here is a tip”. At least it can be expected to be informed about allergies. Regarding subsitutions, see above.

If a corporation willingly abuses every loophole in laws or lack of laws even though it is able to know what would be more beneficial for their customers or humanity or at least to know what the law originally intended, then it’s just plain evil shit. It’s still people who work at companies and make immoral decisions. They have the power to decide.