Recent posts

#51

Off the Record / Re: The AI dooooooom thread

Last post by Jacob - Today at 12:42:34 PM

Saw another article on a place where AI is making things crappier - Amazon self-publishing. It's always had a problem with content that was essentially (at best) wikipedia articles uploaded as books for suckers to buy. But now - according to the article - that market place is completely flooded with shoddy AI generated content. This shuts down a venue for aspiring and unrecognized authors to publish their work.

I guess more generally, AI is likely going to render non-curated or lightly curated places for content non-viable as the return on investment from flooding them with low effort derivative AI generated content is going to be significant enough that non-AI generated work will tend to be drowned out (or not submitted at all).

#52

Off the Record / Re: Israel-Hamas War 2023

Last post by Admiral Yi - Today at 12:25:48 PM

"Eat the sandwich or I shoot your kid in the face."
You really think you chose to eat that sandwich under your own free will?

There is absolutely no reason to believe that Otto thinks the scenario you described does not constitute coercion.  None whatsoever.  The fact that you do indicates a massive failure of basic understanding.

#53

Off the Record / Re: 2024 US Presidential Elect...

Last post by Grey Fox - Today at 12:19:00 PM

Not every candidate is perfect, you have to make decisions--not supporting Hamas is an easy one.

The UNSC is not that important. Really, it doesn't matter.

#54

Off the Record / Re: 2024 US Presidential Elect...

Last post by Crazy_Ivan80 - Today at 12:16:35 PM

Not every candidate is perfect, you have to make decisions--not supporting Hamas is an easy one.

not supporting Russia would be another easy one.

#55

Off the Record / Re: Israel-Hamas War 2023

Last post by PJL - Today at 12:13:54 PM

I'm with Jacob on this. The specifics may be different but I'm broadly in the same boat as him.

#56

Off the Record / Re: 2024 US Presidential Elect...

Last post by Josquius - Today at 12:07:58 PM

Not every candidate is perfect, you have to make decisions--not supporting Hamas is an easy one.

This delusion of yours that Biden supports Hamas is just bizare.
How do you explain
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/17/as-a-palestinian-american-i-cant-vote-for-joe-biden-any-more-and-i-am-not-alone?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

#57

Off the Record / Re: Israel-Hamas War 2023

Last post by Jacob - Today at 12:05:22 PM

But that's just it. I think the only way to evaluate is in the specifics of the transgression. And if the transgression is not targeted at one's own identity, it is easier to wave it by as not warranting any reaction.

Yeah for sure.

Nonetheless, the dynamics by which one transgressor gets subjected to long term consequences while (most) others do not,  often seemingly independently of the seriousness of the transgression, seems arbitrary and problematic to me.

I'll note here that I'm not speaking exclusively about social justice and political related topics but also things like (alleged) animal cruelty, crappy customer and other social behaviour, (alleged) petty crime, road rage, and the like.

That said the main driver of my current ambivalence on the topic is seeing how elements on both sides in the current Israel-Palestinian conflict are attempting (sometimes successfully) to deploy this kind of social media "fuck around and find out" consequence-visiting on their opponents. And since I'm not in a place where I have the moral conviction that "everyone on this side is evil, and everyone on that side stands with truth and justice sufficiently that whatever wrongs they commit are acceptable" I find that the problematic elements of the dynamic stand out much more starkly.

You can posit that that position is informed by privilege, but honestly I think it's more informed by the fact that I don't strongly identify with a side in this particular case and can see the humanity of most of the people involved (and maybe that's a privilege). Normally I do identify with one of the sides (and typically I believe we're on the same side in most things, privilege notwithstanding), and I'm reasonably prone to indulge in "and fuck you, and you... and you deserve what you got you fucker. This is justice being served and it's oh so satisfying", much like many people.

#58

Off the Record / Re: 2024 US Presidential Elect...

Last post by OttoVonBismarck - Today at 12:01:10 PM

Not every candidate is perfect, you have to make decisions--not supporting Hamas is an easy one.

#59

Off the Record / Re: Dead Pool 2024

Last post by viper37 - Today at 11:52:54 AM

I saw some clips of the Depp/Heard trial but I have no opinion on who was right.  I did however get the distinct impression that Johnny Depp is a tool.

Sometimes, there are dysfunctional relationships were no one is right.

One can be a tool, an unfaithful spouse, an addict but not necessarily violent toward the other. Which was the core issue at the trial.  Imho, both ended up looking like fools at their trial.

[Donald Trump's Gettysburg Remarks Trashed by Civil War Historian—'Unhinged']

#60

Off the Record / Re: 2024 US Presidential Elect...

Last post by viper37 - Today at 11:46:37 AM

CIVIL WAR HIJACK!
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-gettysburg-civil-war-historian-1890325

Donald Trump's Gettysburg Remarks Trashed by Civil War Historian—'Unhinged'
Published Apr 15, 2024 at 10:59 AM EDT
Updated Apr 15, 2024 at 11:29 AM EDT
A Civil War historian has called the remarks Donald Trump made about Gettysburg during a campaign rally "unhinged."
Writing on X, formerly Twitter, T.J. Stiles said the former president's take on the Battle of Gettysburg, which was fought between July 1-3, 1863, and killed an estimated 51,000 people, was "inarticulate" and "reductive."
"Gettysburg, what an unbelievable battle that was," Trump said during a Saturday rally in Schnecksville, Pennsylvania, in what was his first campaign event in the battleground state. "It was so much, and so interesting, and so vicious and horrible, and so beautiful in so many different ways—it represented such a big portion of the success of this country," he continued.
"Gettysburg, wow—I go to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, to look and to watch," he said. "And the statement of Robert E. Lee, who's no longer in favor—did you ever notice it? He's no longer in favor. 'Never fight uphill, me boys, never fight uphill.' They were fighting uphill, he said, 'Wow, that was a big mistake,' he lost his great general. 'Never fight uphill, me boys,' but it was too late," Trump added.
Stiles said Trump brought up Pennsylvania to "flatter" the audience and that his views were "inarticulate, reductive."
He added that Trump's analysis of Lee, a general in the battle, was wrong as Lee was not known "to have issued downslope-only orders" and that his depiction of what happened was "rambling, unhinged."
Newsweek contacted a representative for Trump by email to comment on this story.
Stiles is not the only figure who has commented on Trump's speech. Author Stephen King, who is also an outspoken Trump critic, wrote a viral tweet calling the Republican "a dimbulb."
"Trump: 'Gettysburg! Wow!' What a dimbulb," he wrote.
Trump has mentioned the Civil War in previous events. Talking at a rally in Iowa in January, the former president said that the war "could have been negotiated" and thus avoided. On that occasion, Trump didn't suggest how he would have avoided the conflict, but said that he found it "so horrible, but so fascinating."
Pennsylvania has 19 electoral votes, the most of any swing state in the country. Trump won the swing state in 2016 by fewer than 45,000 votes over Hillary Clinton, but lost it to Biden in 2020, who won by about 80,000 votes.

EDIT: apparently Trump's "Gettysburg Address" has made it to Kimmel:

 rambling, unhinged.


Trump?

Nah.  Can't be.