this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2025
129 points (95.7% liked)

Fuck AI

4374 readers
885 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Hegar@fedia.io 19 points 1 day ago (3 children)

That's a fine general principle but some places around the world have very little, and no one locally to give rich-westerner levels of resources.

Giving not-locally can make way more of a difference in more people's lives.

[–] LastYearsIrritant@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 day ago

https://givingmultiplier.org/invite/OLOGIES

This organization lets you donate to someplace locally, and pairs it with a remote organization that provides way more benefit for the dollar.

If you use specific codes, it adds a little extra as well. This one is the link through the Ologies podcast.

I agree with your broad point, however giving locally can still be an effective means to distribute resources at a non-local level. A local community project that I've recently become a part of has links to other groups that operate on a national and international level. It's hard to know what groups are trustworthy across a wide range of issues and scales, but it's easier if there are some groups or campaigns that you trust.

As an example, I was recently talking to someone from a group fundraising for humanitarian aid in Sudan. I don't remember the particular charity they were affiliated with, but I met them through a national event that involves a collaboration of many different progressive political groups and causes. At this event, there was also a lot of local level stuff going on (and I was there because I had learned of it through my aforementioned local group).

It's not perfect, but it seems better than the decision paralysis caused by feeling insufficiently well-informed to know which fundraising efforts are worthwhile.

[–] thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

when your local community is well enough that it no longer needs a hand out, you can then spread your local further

[–] rainwall@piefed.social 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

What is "well enough?"

If $100 locally can help 3 people survive but $100 globally helps 30-300 people survive, when is it the right time to stop giving locally?

"Give locally" is quipy and has some truth, but there is nuance it excludes.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Good point. $100 in the Philippines is a shitload of money. My wife's ex-husband took a large group (12 people I think?) of her friends and family out to a nice seafood restaurant. $50 tab, including a generous tip.

But there's something to be said about raising yourself up before you can help others.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

My community and the planet in general would be awesome if resources were distributed equitably.

No "charity" is ever going to fix that.