• 0 Posts
  • 220 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 7th, 2023

help-circle
  • At the height of digg, I thought Rose was kind of cool. One of those Silicon Valley success stories that used to inspire tech enthusiasts like me. I watched diggnation and bought in to the culture being presented. But I’ll never forget that when digg 4 released, and bombed, Kevin threw his own employees and developers under the bus instead of taking responsibility for strategic mistakes. It was really eye opening to me about him and many of the other frauds that Silicon Valley hoists up as role models. Since then, he’s done nothing to dissuade me that he’s just another talentless tech-bro asshole that got way more attention and money than he deserved.





  • First off, it’s not about majority, it’s about plurality. But that’s just nitpicking.

    The disagreement here is about how a party achieves pluralities. They could follow a strategy of running toward the positions in their opposition, or they can do it by attempting to convince members of their opposition about the merits of their principled positions. Some compromises will frequently be practical, but enshrining compromise itself as a core principle, as opposed to policy, is only a strategy for maintaining power for power’s sake. Democracy should be more than team sports IMO.

    Again, just look at what happened in the last 40 years. Asymmetrical consensus seeking has fueled the march of American fascism. Unless you want to argue that democracies will always inevitably slide toward fascism, I refuse to accept your characterization of democracy.


  • This is the strategy that Democrats have followed since 1988. In that time, the Overton window has relentlessly shifted to the right. It is the dynamic that makes it politically practical for Republicans to also relentlessly shift further right. It’s a positive feedback loop that eventually spirals toward fascism. Just examine the last four decades. It’s right there.

    It’s not ‘consensus building’ when the other party has a principled opposition to consensus. It’s just a pre-negotiated concession. It is a lack leadership. That is the Democratic Party in a nutshell.





  • Why should it feel a need to respond? This administration and congress have shown nothing but breathless support for every illegal and inhuman action they’ve taken and imposed exactly zero meaningful consequences for violating the few feckless ‘red lines’ Biden has feigned to impose. They have nearly complete ideological and/or monetary capture of the administration and congress, and the US professional media is salivating about having more wars to cover. Both presidential candidates have promised no change in policy. Furthermore, the international community seems to be largely unwilling to meaningfully intervene and challenge US hegemony.




  • First of all, there was no way for Israel to know whether the people they claim to be targeting were combatants when the attack occurred since Israel had no information about the status of these bombs when they chose to detonate them.

    Secondly, placing a bomb in a common device that you have every reason to believe will spend much of its time in the proximity of civilians, in homes, markets and other public spaces, and choosing to detonate it without knowledge of the location of the bomb, or it’s proximity to your supposed target, is actively avoiding distinguishing between ‘combatants’ and civilians. I can’t believe that western brain rot requires this to be spelled out for it.








  • This take is correct although I would make one addition. It is true that copyright violation doesn’t happen when copyrighted material is inputted or when models are trained. While the outputs of these models are not necessarily copyright violations, it is possible for them to violate copyright. The same standards for violation that apply to humans should apply to these models.

    I entirely reject the claims that there should be one standard for humans and another for these models. Every time this debate pops up, people claim some province based on ‘intelligence’ or ‘conscience’ or ‘understanding’ or ‘awareness’. This is a meaningless argument because we have no clear understanding about what those things are. I’m not claiming anything about the nature of these models. I’m just pointing out that people love to apply an undefined standard to them.

    We should apply the same copyright standards to people, models, corporations, and old-school algorithms.