Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)M
Posts
0
Comments
263
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • There’s always room for reasonable disagreement when the issue in question is a word whose definition contains an element of intent and is therefore unfalsifiable.

    This sounds to me that you would rather discuss semantics, than spend five minutes trying to actually falsify the term "genocide" when applied to Palestine [0] [1] [2]

    These links alone are enough to prove intent from the defence ministry.

    [0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/may/28/israels-defence-minister-says-large-scale-palestinian-migration-from-gaza-will-go-ahead

    [1] https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israel-politics/2026-03-26/ty-article/.premium/no-innocent-children-israeli-lawmaker-defends-killing-of-palestinian-family/0000019d-2976-d8a3-abff-39764b2e0000

    [2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/aug/17/israeli-general-aharon-haliva-palestinians-7-october-gaza

  • AI slop is not a valid source.

    After graduating from high school, Vance enlisted in the United States Marine Corps as a private,[33] serving as a combat correspondent (military journalist) with the 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing.[34] During his four years of service, he was deployed to Iraq in 2005 for six months in a non-combat role, writing articles and taking photographs.[33] In December 2005, he was part of a group of Marines that held a roundtable discussion with Vice President Dick Cheney.[35] He attained the rank of corporal, and his decorations include the Marine Corps Good Conduct Medal and the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal.[36] In 2007, Vance left the military and used the G. I. Bill[37][38] to study at Ohio State

    In short, deployed for 6 months, never saw combat once.

  • You’re thanking the guy because he spent three minutes searching for the answer you were so clearly sealioning for.

    Good job I guess.

  • … there is something deeply and personally disturbing to me about people who identify strongly with it

    As opposed to those who call themselves gamers or trekkies?

    Sure.

  • Maybe you just don’t get it? Or maybe you’re trying to look for differences where there really aren’t any, in order to belittle pastimes you don’t personally like.

    Because, unless you’re terminally online, you must be familiar with the fact that millions of people just enjoy watching football, and follow teams and players, sometimes regardless of their performance on the pitch. It’s a social and cultural phenomenon.

    But anyway, just so you know, shitting on football fans stopped being edgy circa 2010, around the same time fedoras went out of fashion.

  • The problem I have with Messi t-shirts, and all that shit, is I don't know why people want to identify with Messi other than "He is the BEST."

    You wrote a long message explaining the why, yet you aren’t able to connect the final dots.

    People wearing Queen t-shirts may also think that they are the “best”. People playing Minecraft may think too that it is the “best”. They enjoy listening to Queen, playing Minecraft, and watching Messi, and precisely because of that, they may think these are all the “best”.

    Maybe the issue here is that you either don’t enjoy football, or don’t like Messi as a player?

  • Again, yeah, they will obey Swiss law, exactly what it says in their marketing material. Shocker.

    I’m curious to know if you really believe that there are companies out there that would break the law in order to protect their users, and if so, which ones.

  • I like Proton, but that seems to be controversial these days.

  • Oh no, Proton PR is pro Bernie Sanders?

    You can't say Proton is legally mandated to violate privacy while pushing a Proton-backed page that says

    I can absolutely say that. Because as much as a trumper you think the CEO is, Proton wouldn’t collaborate with the DOJ under such scenario unless they wanted to be screwed in the courts of the country they operate from. But if they receive a lawful requirement that, under Swiss law, needs to be fulfilled, then they must.

    You believe that Switzerland is some sort of haven where international law doesn’t apply. That’s not true. You believe that Swiss law only applies in one direction, i.e. individual privacy protection, but not in any other, i.e. lawful data sharing requests from law enforcement. Then the issue is what you chose to believe. Here’s the thing: any company offering a service must comply with the laws of the country they are based on. And if you think that there are commercial mail providers that would rather cease operations before handing data to law enforcement, oh boy do I have news for you.

  • At the time it was true, corporate dems were way more likely to be in bed with big tech. That’s just a fact.

    The "it doesn't matter" part of the blog post is also dangerously inaccurate, implying any privacy violation in Switzerland is illegal while, in reality, Swiss authorities have gotten Proton to disclose user data several times in high-profile incidents. Here's the biggest one in my mind. And another and another.

    Ah, I remember you now. You’re the guy who thinks that privacy equals absolute immunity from court orders! That’s never the case and will never be.

  • I suppose we read different things, because what they said is that republicans aren’t “friendly with big tech” and that’s a good thing. There are other blog posts where they explain their position in detail, like https://proton.me/blog/trump-control-nsa-privacy

    I'm familiar with this link though.

    Yours doesn’t load for me.

    You may be familiar, but you refuse to argue on its merits and sources, of which there are plenty.

    And by the way, if we were to talk astroturfing, there are a handful of accounts in this community that consistently post negative comments about Proton. I’m not saying this is an orchestrated attack against them, but it’s really damn suspicious that in every topic tangential to privacy or VPNs, there’s always someone mentioning how awful Proton is.

  • I think you misunderstood. I don’t believe calling LLMs “stochastic parrots” is accurate, but I think that dismissing them as such puts them at the same level as astrology, in the sense that both would be useless in order to predict an outcome based purely on their inputs.

    In other words, I do think that LLMs have some value to them, even when issues like “hallucinations” will never be resolved.

    On the other hand, I don’t think astrology is valuable at all. There hasn’t been a single accurate prediction made by astrologers that could be replicated within the same conditions at a different time. Descriptions of phenomena in astrology are also deliberately vague, so they could be “massaged” to fit the outcomes. Astrology is, at its core and necessarily, post hoc, so suggesting that it is a misunderstood discipline based on actual science is just naive.

  • You don’t have to accept its interpretive claims

    What’s the value, then? It sounds like its results are correlations between loosely interpreted measurements, i.e. two identical sets of observations may correlate to different events, depending on subjective post hoc interpretations.

    Is that what you mean when you compared this to AI? Because LLMs are stochastic parrots?

  • Please tell me more about astrology as a millenary discipline.

  • AI is like astrology

    Please keep going.

  • Photography did threaten a large number of painters livelihoods.

    No, it did not. The story is missing a critical component: anyone who had the money to commission a paint would still do it. Anyone who didn’t, wouldn’t. If anything, photography expanded the portrait market to those people who couldn’t afford a painting.

    And if you're going to put the bar of art as simply eliciting a human emotion reaction or feeling. Then by your own definition AI generated art is art.

    I didn’t say that. I said that art requires skill as well, and skill in art, in order to elicit a human emotion necessarily involves a purpose that is worthwhile. Otherwise everything, from trolling to taking a dump, could be considered art, and it is not.

    You could argue that prompting a LLM is a skill and it could carry a purpose, but I fundamentally disagree with that and I haven’t seen any AI creation that would lead me to change my mind just yet. Let’s put it this way: if I commission a paint, describe in the highest detail what I want in it, the painter does exactly what I asked them to do, and it turns out great, I wouldn’t be an artist, I would be a patron. Now, if the painter decides to just copy and rehash bits and pieces from other paintings with no purpose other than to hide their own inability to create, they would be a plagiarist, not an artist.

    Going back to photography, it honestly sounds like your baseline is the skill required to capture something with the highest fidelity possible. Then yeah, painters would be thoroughly fucked. But photography as an art is way more than that, it’s about capturing a moment in the photographer’s own terms. And in that regard, it doesn’t differ from painting at all, unless you wanted to argue that Manet or Dali were trying to portrait the world as everyone sees it.

    But AI art? Come on man, most people can barely verbalize what they want for dinner, how are they going to prompt a LLM to create art? “Paint the unbearable lightness of being, make no mistakes”?

  • I am not “anti neural networks”. What is this, 2010? Jeez…