This is what I’m referring to. Palestinians hopeful that Harris will bring change and feeling encouraged that she’s rebuked Netanyahu.
If people digging out their dead children can be hopeful that she’ll bring change, instead of cynical, perhaps you should follow their example.
Yeah, no. Look at what they’re actually saying. Their position is that they’re hopeful Harris will bring a difference and they’re impressed that she’s rebuked Netanyahu.
Oh good point, I guess those Palestinians forgot all about the bombing and dead children and digging out their families when they said they prefer Harris to Trump.
You ain’t no fucking ally, so don’t pretend to be one. Responding to “Palestinians seem to prefer Harris” with “they’ll be ecstatic that a brown woman is bombing them” is infantilising them and their opinions. It’s disgusting.
Just say it, “anticolonialist”. Say what you really mean, and that you know better than all of us brown people about what’s best for us. Go on, continue to deride our difficult choices and tell us how much better you know than us.
You aren’t living up to your username, and I hope that makes you second guess things. As a brown guy you’re no better than a colonialist in my eyes. And I think my people have had enough of you.
Wanna tell that to these Palestinians? It is patronizing colonialism to suggest you know better than they do.
Slow death is far more preferably then it isn’t incurable and terminal. It creates an opportunity to stop the death. A peace agreement a year from now under Harris means way more people are still alive than if it’s under Trump.
That’s all that should matter. Slowing it gives time for intervention and for an opposition coalition to grow. This conflict has been going on for decades. Do you really believe things would be better if Israel just killed everyone 20 years ago? Do you believe things will be better if Israel kills everyone now, versus this conflict still existing in 20 years?
Consider to what actual Palestinians in Gaza are saying. They have a clear preference for Harris over Trump.
No, but:
It will build enthusiasm and make it more likely for people to actually go out and vote.
It’s the fucking right thing to do, and I’m glad to see a politician stand for it.
That was the moment I realized he was either going to be Tony Stark or Lex Luther.
And then he goes and proves me wrong by being worse than ever imaginable.
Do we know if those 2800+ injured are mostly militants, or mostly civilian?
Easy loophole. Tell Eastern European countries they can do whatever the hell they want. I think several have a score to settle with Russia.
But seriously if Putin would prefer to not have deep strikes into Russia, then maybe we could meet him halfway – send a NATO coalition to Ukraine and steamroll Russia out. Including from Crimea.
I think overall that is very much so the case. This is the exception, not the norm.
Why Travis? Taylor can probably beat his ass without any help
It’s one of the very few ethical ways to become a billionaire I think. If you sell an album or book for $10, and you’re a global sensation, it’s reasonable you’ll get 100 million people buying it. It just falls on you then to use that money for his good reasons and adequately compensate people who support you. And Swift has generally been really good about that.
There is an easy answer to this, but it’s not being pursued by AI companies because it’ll make them less money, albeit totally ethically.
Make all LLM models free to use, regardless of sophistication, and be collaborative with sharing the algorithms. They don’t have to be open to everyone, but they can look at requests and grant them on merit without charging for it.
So how do they make money? How goes Google search make money? Advertisements. If you have a good, free product, advertisement space will follow. If it’s impossible to make an AI product while also properly compensating people for training material, then don’t make it a sold product. Use copyright training material freely to offer a free product with no premiums.
Copyright is a lesser evil compared to taking human labor and creativity for free to sell a product.
So how do you know that she’s actually against genocide and not just saying it to get some support? If nobody has to trust her word, then why believe her there?
What has she done? Is she organizing demonstrations to protest against Israel and in favor of a cease fire? Is she using her party apparatus to fundraise and donate 100% of proceeds to Gaza aid? Is she trying to speak with Biden, Blinken, or even Democrat congressional members who agree with her?
Or is she just lazing on Twitter and saying how awful it is while also excusing Russia’s casus belli into Ukraine?
This whole thing is symbolic of her failure, lack of seriousness, and grifting. She isn’t actually doing anything for the causes she claims are super important and her top priority. She’s just being a Twitter activist and saying she’s very concerned. Stein doesn’t do things. She says things. Her actions don’t reflect any convictions.
No, but why would you trust the word of someone who makes those arguments?
If she thinks wifi may cause cancer, that we can totally phase out fossil fuels with no loss in quality of life by 2030, that we should phase out nuclear energy, and that we should entertain vaccine skepticism… Why should I even bother to listen to an anti science quack like her?
I want the genocide to end. I want someone in power who wants it to end and has a plan to make it end. Everything Jill Stein has said suggests to me she has no idea how reality actually works, nor that she has any ideas on how to achieve her stated goals. She’s just virtue signaling.
Now, a good leader can’t do or plan everything. They aren’t going to come up with every solution. That’s what they have advisors and like-minded allies in Congress for. If Stein was elected, she would have no fellow Greens in Congress, and we have no guarantee that she’d actually pick experts as her advisors – I’d actually expect the contrary from someone who thinks Wi-Fi causes cancer. But we don’t really know because the Green Party is utterly ineffectual and just cosplays every 4 years.
That’s a slippery slope fallacy. We can compensate the person with direct ownership without going through a chain of causality. We already do this when we buy goods and services.
I think the key thing in what you’re saying about AI is “fully open source… locally execute it on their own hardware”. Because if that’s the case, I actually don’t have any issues with how it uses IP or copyright. If it’s an open source and free to use model without any strings attached, I’m all for it using copyrighted material and ignoring IP restrictions.
My issue is with how OpenAI and other companies do it. If you’re going to sell a trained proprietary model, you don’t get to ignore copyright. That model only exists because it used the labor and creativity of other people – if the model is going to be sold, the people whose efforts went into it should get adequately compensated.
In the end, what will generative AI be – a free, open source tool, or a paid corporate product? That determines how copyrighted training material should be treated. Free and open source, it’s like a library. It’s a boon to the public. But paid and corporate, it’s just making undeserved money.
Funny enough, I think when we’re aligned on the nature and monetization of the AI model, we’re in agreement on copyright. Taking a picture of my turnips for yourself, or to create a larger creative project you sell? Sure. Taking a picture of my turnips to use in a corporation to churn out a product and charge for it? Give me my damn share.
They’re someone else’s turnips though, not yours. If you’re going to make money selling pictures of them, don’t you think the person who grew the turnips deserves a fair share of the proceeds?
Or from another perspective, if the person who grew them requests payment in return for you to take pictures of them, and you don’t want to pay it – why don’t you go find other turnips? Or grow your own?
These LLMs are an end product of capitalism – exploiting other people’s labor and creativity without paying them so you can get rich.
I can’t make money without using OpenAI’s paid products for free.
Checkmate motherfucker
Actual Palestinians didn’t find it meaningless, apparently. And if they can believe it, so can we.
Of everyone, people in Gaza have the most right to be cynical. Yet, they aren’t. If they have hope, who are we to say their hope is wrong?