Skip Navigation

Posts
39
Comments
538
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Yes, Israeli Zionists have been playing the anti-Semitism card for decades. It is a perfidious, self-reinforcing strategy: the more completely legitimate criticism of Israel's inhumane actions is silenced with this argument, the more it feeds actual anti-Semitism.

    This is supported by the Mossad's skillful intelligence work, which obviously gathered a lot of dirt on politicians around the world - there is simply no other explanation for how a small, rather insignificant state like Israel has gotten away with the most heinous atrocities for decades.

    This is mainly attributable to the US, but also to Germany, my home country, where the anti-Semitism card has an even stronger effect due to its terrible past. As a German citizen with an awareness of history, it is all the more repulsive for me to see how obvious war criminals shamelessly use the Holocaust in order to commit genocide themselves.

    Yet it is quite simple: Israel is not Judaism. It is a criminal but sovereign state that commits genocide. This has nothing to do with religion, but exclusively with the inhuman ruthlessness of their criminal regime.

    And yes, this is also supported by the population, just as it was in the Third Reich, since Israel is also a deeply authoritarian state, but these are not "the Jews", but the citizens of a State, the citizens of Israel, a country that commits the most terrible war crimes and tries to justify them by referring to history - it is a scandal that this still works, it is a crime against their own ancestors and has absolutely nothing to do with anti-Semitism; except that it very deliberately promotes anti-Semitism in itself in order to portray Israel's actions as the views of "the Jews" - which is, of course, not at all the case.

    They have even introduced absurd concepts such as the "self-hating Jew" to prevent Jews from insisting that they want nothing to do with the deeply racist, inhumane Zionism of Israel.

    It couldn't be more unscrupulous.

    These people are truly the scum of the earth - and by "these people", I don't mean a religious group, as these people would like to portray it, but Netanyahu, the Israeli government, and all their henchmen.

  • The connection to Israel is becoming increasingly obvious. Ehud Barak, the former Israeli prime minister, was also involved in setting up this fascist enterprise - with the kind assistance of Jeffrey Epstein!

    Many thanks also to the politicians here in Germany who first signed a completely illegal contract with these bastards and then specifically amended the police law to undermine the constitutional rights of citizens after the fact.

    It really is a terrible world we live in, because no one is stopping the most unscrupulous of all people. Well, this is what the end stage of the free market economy looks like.

  • What do you expect? The man is a washed-up talk show host and a drunk. He is by no means the only completely unsuitable buffoon in this incompetent, criminal administration.

    Just for comparison: the Secretary of Education, Lisa McMahon, is a former wrestling promoter (Vince McMahon's wife), and the Secretary of Health, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., is a conspiracy theorist and anti-vaccination advocate - not to mention the president.

    All of this is so ridiculous that it would be funny if it weren't costing so many lives...

  • Indeed, and a murderer

  • Yea, if this second-rate talk show host really wanted to hunt down the enemies of the country, he and his glorified "warfighters" would have to go after himself and all that criminal MAGA scum.

    But he certainly won't do that. Instead, he'd rather continue murdering people in violation of international law and perhaps terrorize the US population a little more.

  • This was all foreseeable long in advance:

    We also don't fight with stupid rules of engagement. We untie the hands of our warfighters to intimidate, demoralize, hunt and kill the enemies of our country. No more politically correct and overbearing rules of engagement, just common sense, maximum lethality and authority for warfighters.

    Pete Hegseth [Source]

    It is, after all, a criminal regime. Anyone who supports it is complicit and should bear in mind that it will not be those at the top who bear the consequences.

  • We also don't fight with stupid rules of engagement. We untie the hands of our warfighters to intimidate, demoralize, hunt and kill the enemies of our country. No more politically correct and overbearing rules of engagement, just common sense, maximum lethality and authority for warfighters.

    Pete Hegseth [Source]

  • What do you expect to change for the world? The US has been a plutocracy for decades. Really not all too much difference to states like Russia - just another approach. The people in power did whatever they wanted to do for a very long time. Now they are just changing their modus operandi and giving up the pretense. Why? - well, because they can.

    The only thing that worries me is that they could lose control over their straw man in the White House, but I think that's unlikely because he's much more like Hermann Göring than Adolf Hitler. He may be a hopeless narcissist, but he's so incredibly greedy that filthy lucre and indulging his perversions are probably more important to him than real power, because power means commitment, and he'd rather go golfing.

  • Wow, the US really is just a complete clown show - the usual ridiculousness has increased many times over since January, and so has the greed. But yet: there is hardly any serious resistance to the obvious establishment of a dictatorship. Well, the citizens are probably so used to living in an unjust state that they think it wouldn't make any difference.

    For everyone else in the world, it probably won't really make a difference, except that they'll have to deal with another mentally ill despot. But I think that despite all the regime's open organized crime, despite its brutish violence, the majority of US citizens still don't understand what it means to live in a dictatorship.

    We can only hope that the US will not resort to excessive use of its inflated military apparatus when the country inevitably continues to decline. Given the viciousness of the regime, this is unfortunately to be expected.

    It would be great if the Americans could finally lock these criminals away, but to be honest, I gave up hope of that a long time ago.

  • I would say that we will very soon find ourselves in 1984 or perhaps Brazil, with a little bit of The Circle and Her thrown in, but overall it will be more like The Road due to climate change, unless Elysium technology has been developed by then, which is unlikely, but if so, it will certainly be used as depicted in the film.

  • Thank you! I might get back to you on that sometime.

  • Yes, that could well be the case. Perhaps I am overly suspicious, but because the potential of LLMs to influence public opinion is so high due to their reach and the way they present information, I think it is highly likely that the companies offering them are already profiting from this, or at least will do so very soon.

    Musk is already demonstrating in his clumsy way that it is easily possible to manipulate the output in a targeted manner if you have full control over the model – and this isn't the first time he has attracted attention for doing so. You almost have to be grateful to him for it, because it's so obvious. If you do it more subtly, it's even more dangerous.

    In any case, the fact is that the more people use LLMs, the more "interpretive authority" will be centralized, because the development and operation of LLMs is so costly that only a few large corporations can afford it – and they want to make money and are unscrupulous in doing so.

    In any case, we will not be able to rely on people's ability to recognize attempts at manipulation. I think this is already evident from the fact that obvious misinformation on mainstream social media platforms and elsewhere is believed unquestioningly by so many people. Unfortunately, the effects are disastrous: if people were more critical, Trump would never have become US president, for example – certainly not twice.

  • Yes, it's clear that some of this may have to do with the fact that even if cloud LLMs have live browsing capabilities, they often still rely on outdated information from their training data. I am simply describing my impressions from somewhat extensive use of cloud LLMs.

    I don't have a list of examples, but in my comment above I have mentioned two that I find suspicious.

    I simply think that these products should be used with skepticism as a matter of principle. This is simply because none of the companies that offer them are known for ethical behavior - quite the opposite.

    In the case of Google, for example, I don't think it will be too long before (public) advertising opportunities are implemented in Gemeni, because Google's business model is essentially the advertising business. The other cloud LLMs are also products of purely profit-oriented companies—and manipulating public opinion is a multi-billion dollar business that they will certainly not want to miss out on. Social media platforms have demonstrated this in the past as has Google and others with their "classic" search engines, targeting and data selling schemes. Whether this raises ethical issues is likely to be of little concern to these companies as their only concern is profit.

    The simple fact is that it is completely unclear what logic the providers use to regulate the output. It is equally unclear what criteria are used to select training data (here, too, the output can already be influenced by deliberately omitting certain information).

    What I am getting at is that it can be assumed that all providers are interested in maximizing profits—and it is therefore likely that they will allow themselves to be paid to specifically promote certain topics, products, or even worldviews, or to withhold information that is unwelcome to wealthy interest groups.

    As a regular user of cloud LLMs, I have the impression that this is already happening. I cannot prove this tho, as it would require systematic, scientific studies to demonstrate whether and to what effects manipulation occurs. Unfortunately, I do not know whether such studies already exist.

    However, it is a fact that in the past, all technologies that could have been used to serve humanity have been massively abused for profit. I don't understand why it should be any different with cloud LLMs, which are offered exclusively by some of the world's largest corporations.

  • Thx for clarifying.

    I once tried a community version from huggingface (distilled), which worked quite well even on modest hardware. But that was a while ago. Unfortunately, I haven't had much time to look into this stuff lately, but I wanted to check that again at some point.

  • For example, objective information about Israel's actions in Gaza. The International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants against leading members of the government a long time ago, and the UN OHCHR classifies the actions of the State of Israel as genocide. However, these facts are by no means presented as clearly as would be appropriate given the importance of these institutions. Instead, when asked whether Israel is committing genocide, one receives vague, meaningless answers. Only when specifically asked whether numerous reputable institutions actually classify Israel's actions as genocide do most LLMs reveal that much, if not all, evidence points to this being the case. In my opinion, this is a deliberate method of obscuring reality, as the vast majority of users will not or cannot ask questions if they are unaware of the UN OHCHR's assessment or do not know that arrest warrants have been issued against leading members of the Israeli government on suspicion of war crimes (many other reputable institutions have come to the same conclusion as the UN OHCHR and the International Criminal Court).

    Another example: if you ask whether it is legally permissible to describe Donald Trump as a rapist, you will be told that this is defamation. However, a judge in the Carroll case has explicitly stated that this description applies to Trump – so it is in fact legally permissible to describe him as such. Again, this information is only available upon explicit request, if at all. This also distorts reality for people who are not yet informed. However, since many people initially seek information from LLMs, this leads to them being misinformed because they lack the background knowledge to ask explicit follow-up questions when given misleading answers.

    Given the influence of both Israel and the US president, I cannot help but suspect that there is an intention behind this.

  • Yes, that's true. It is resource-intensive, but unlike other capable LLMs, it is somewhat possible—not for most private individuals due to the requirements, but for companies with the necessary budget.

  • Ahh, thank you—I had misunderstood that, since Deepseek is (more or less) an open-source LLM from China that can also be used and fine-tuned on your own device using your own hardware.

  • You mean Deepseek on a local device?

  • I use various AI models and I repeatedly notice that certain information is withheld or misrepresented, even though it is freely available in abundance and is therefore part of the training data.

    I don't think this is a coincidence, especially since the operators of all cloud LLMs are so business-minded.

  • Although Grok's manipulation is so blatantly obvious, I don't believe that most people will come to realize that those who control LLMs will naturally use this power to pursue their interests.

    They will continue to use ChatGPT and so on uncritically and take everything at face value because it's so nice and easy, overlooking or ignoring that their opinions, even their reality, are being manipulated by a few influential people.

    Other companies are more subtle about it, but from OpenAI to MS, Google, and Anthropic, all cloud models are specifically designed to control people's opinions—they are not objective, but the majority of users do not question them as they should, and that is what makes them so dangerous.