You want Biden to do genocide? Isn't culling the Supreme Court enough?
The Republicans should never have gone down this road in the first place.
I think this is the crutch of our disagreement. My question to you is why? The Republicans want power. They want to turn the US into a Free Market Theocracy. Why shouldn't they do what they are doing? I personally think what they are doing is bad, but why should they care?
Getting mad at the Democrats for not being good enough to stop that is akin to victim blaming.
I am more interested in your response to my first point, but I couldn't let this stand. It's such a bad comparison. Both the Dems and Republicans are fighting for power, they are not a victim and an aggressor, they are both aggressors.
Do you blame the thief, or do you blame the homeowner for not having better locks?
I blame the police for not arresting the thief when they revealed their plans to rob my house before they robbed it.
I don't think you understand. No reasonable person thinks that republicans are good or not to blame. Blaming the republicans won't stop them from taking power. They have done and continue to do what they have said they will do and the Democratic party has done nothing to stop them.
It's like your sky diving, and your parachute fails to open. Do you get upset at gravity or the guy who packed your parachute? Yeah, gravity is what is going to kill you, but it doesn't care, that was the plan. The guy who packed the parachute is your only real way of controlling the situation.
The Democratic Party packed the parachute and it isn't opening. Hopefully it does soon.
I didn't blame Hillary. Hillary did her best. I blame the Democratic organization who decided to run Hillary. They could have run Bernie. They could have run somebody who had more charisma.
The average voter is retarded. They need to see strength and charisma.
How much do the Democrats need to mess up before they can be considered to be working with the Republicans instead of against them?
Clinton was one whoopsie in a chain of mistakes that has led us here.
Edit: I am getting a significant amount of replies saying that I'm being mean to Hillary. To be clear, I'm not dogging on her. She did her best. I'm upset at the Democratic party for putting her against Trump. She lacks charisma, it's not her fault.
Only in so much as the Supreme Court decides that it is "legal".
So the details are that the Supreme Court left it open to interpretation as to what could be considered an "Official Act". If the Supreme Court decides your murder spree is an "Official Act" you are good to go.
So if the Supreme Court Justices are conservative when Biden goes to trial, then yes, he can be found guilty.
Yeah I was confused by the article when they said they would regret it. Yeah if they cared, but they don't.
What price should cable be? Who gives a shit, 100 dollars. There I did, supreme Court's justices can do it too.
As someone who doesn't pay close attention to what Google does at the top of the page, this is not obvious to me. Glad it is a shit post and not something Google actually responded with.
I have used LLMs before and they are occasionally wrong, seems like you don't disagree. I don't see how someone who isn't deeply familiar with LLMs would be obviously tipped off that this post is a shit post. As for the graphs, who knows, Google probably already has that working. I've seen LLMs make up songs before too.
AI would never write this.
Why not? I figure you could train an AI to write this. I could see a Google engineer messing up and producing a bad AI. GPT2 engineers has made this mistake before.
The fact that you are believing it doesn’t speak to the danger of AI as much as it speaks to the gullibility of people.
This is kind of like saying "the problem with nuclear bombs is that people are too easy to evaporate at high temperatures, not the bombs themselves". Yeah, that is true, but it's really hard to make people less gullible. I wouldn't say LLM's and AI are bad or we should stop using them. But I think people like you need to understand that the average person is not on your level, and you need to slow your roll.
If I said “obama made a law to put babies in woodchippers”....
I don't think this is a good comparison, because Obama has been around for a while and most people believe Obama wouldn't do that. Now if Obama went from being a nobody to president in a day and then someone told me the about the woodchipper law. I would be unsure and have to double check. It wouldn't be obvious. Likewise, since LLMs are relatively new to most people, it's going to take a while before most people figure out what is a normal mistake by an LLM vs an obviously faked mistake by a shit poster.
Ok, your not the original person. Is this an obvious shit post in your opinion?
Because if it isn't obvious how am I supposed to know this is a shit post or not?
Ohhh, I think I get it.
This place is a safe space for people to talk about ideas, but not have to back them up with rational arguments. I don't think this is a place for me.
Just make sure this place doesn't turn into a Nazi Bar https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Nazi_bar. Theses kinds of places all seem vulnerable to that.
But I repeat, there is no “correct” answer, and therefore no judgment.
I agree, there is no globally "correct" answer. For example, a leftist and a fascist cant both achieve the outcomes they want by doing the same thing. Either an action is good for the leftist or the fascist. There are a few exceptions like eating, drinking, and sleeping, where both will be helped, but doesn't really help their political causes.
If I said to you, that I wanted to make a sandwich right now. Doing that wouldn't be inherently correct or incorrect, because it is my life and I want a sandwich. But if I then started to play videogames, you can then say that my actions are not correct per my goal of immediately making a sandwich. There are a number of things that I could do to start making a sandwich like getting utensils or checking the fridge for ingredients, that would align with my goal of making a sandwich and their for would be correct. We could argue about which steps are more correct than others, but depending on the situation, that may not be necessary.
Likewise, if someone claiming to be fascist was telling other fascists not to vote for Trump. That would not be correct behavior for a fascist. That person is acting incorrectly against their stated goals. That means either they don't have all the facts of the situation, or they are lying about being a fascist.
Now, am I saying that if you plan to vote for Trump, you are a fascist, no, I don't know what you are. All I am saying is your actions are in line with someone who is a fascist and that is pretty sus.
To summarize, if someone has a stated goal, they can be correct/incorrect relative to that stated goal.
I myself am struggling with whether/how to vote
A good first step is to figure out which way you want to vote is to figure out what you want to maximize/minimize the world. If you hypothetically want to minimize genocide you have to estimate how much genocide will happen if Trump gets elected vs Biden gets elected. Count, up those numbers and act toward the best possible outcome per your goals.
Yes, all feelings are valid. The correct answer though, depends on the outcomes you desire. If you personally want to maximize the amount of time we have to improve the current system, then voting for Biden is the correct choice here. If you don't, that is fine too, I am not judging.
I will only judge if your actions/rhetoric don't align with what you want to maximize in this world.
As for violating 2. I disagree, working within a broken system is not defending it. There are may ways I would like to improve the current US "democracy".
As for violating 5. I agree, my post is violating it. Should I take it down?
Sorry about that, the phone app I use doesn't make is easy to see the rules.
Both a Democratic and Republican party are going towards the same destination. It's fascism.
It's just that one party is currently walking towards it and the other is running towards it.
To maximize the amount of time we have to organize, we should vote for the walking one. Unfortunately, this means holding our nose and voting for Biden.
Adobe sees what the Unity game engine did and the outcome.
"Yeah let's do that but slightly different."
So, I have come to the conclusion that the word "want" in my brain has two closely related meanings.
- Something I want right now for the dopamine. Ex Ice Cream.
- Something that I want for my self long term. Ex to be healthy.
It is hard enough to organize my thoughts normally, but when I have competing wants like Ice Cream, vs to be healthy. It really sucks to have the same word for both.
Does anyone else feel this way? Is there other words that you use to help separated these ideas in your head?
I am writing a unit test and mocking library in C and I want to set the call stack memory to some pre determined value like memset. I want to do this before the test function is called so the test writer can verify they aren't using uninitialized memory in their tests. Is there any somewhat portable way to do this?
I just found out that Battle Bit Remastered exists and it supports 254 simultaneous players per game.
I am wondering how that is even possible. Does anyone know of any details on how they achieved it? Are there any resources for making a networking engine capable of supporting that many players?