Rottcodd

I propose that the thing that’s already looming on the horizon not be called an AI “bubble,” but an AI “pimple,” not least because it’s going to be so satisfying when it pops.

Sort of.

More it’s just the way I’ve pretty much always been. Before I was even really aware of it, I apparently figured out that I couldn’t control the outside world but I could control how I reacted to it, so that was what I focused on. One could sort of say that I did it simply because it made sense to me, but even that makes it sound more conscious than it was. It’s more that it just never occurred to me to do things any other way.

It was only much later that I discovered that there was a philosophy called “stoicism” that advocated that.

“You have power over your mind - not outside events. Realize this and you will find strength.” - Marcus Aurelius

I recognize that the universe is so vast that it’s likely that life forms other than us exist in it, but that’s the extent of it.

I’ve seen no verifiable evidence that they in fact do, so I don’t “believe” that they do.

Really, I don’t “believe” in much of anything for which there is no verifiable evidence. I don’t even understand how that works - how it is that other people apparently do. It’s not a conscious choice or anything - it’s just appears that there’s a set of requirements that must be met before the position of “belief” is triggered inside my mind, and one of those requirements is verifiable evidence. Without that, the state of “believing” just isn’t triggered, and it’s not as if I can somehow force it, so that’s that.

As far as I can see, governments are comprised almost entirely of psychopaths, opportunists, charlatans and fools, so I see little likelihood that they possess concealed knowledge regarding any nominal extraterrestrial life. First, and most simply, if they did possess any such knowledge, it’s near certain that somebody would’ve blabbed something by now.

Beyond that though, I think it’s exceedingly unlikely that any alien life form capable of traveling interstellar distances would, on arriving on the Earth, seek out contact with a government, much less limit its contact to a government. If they’re that advanced, it can only be the case that they, in their own development, either never bought into the flatly ludicrous and clearly destructive idea of institutionalized authority or overcame it before it inevitably destroyed them, and in either case, I don’t see any reason why they would lend any credence to our mass delusion that this one subset of humanity forms a specially qualified and empowered elite that rightly oversees everyone else’s interests. That’s our delusion - not theirs.

Right, but it’s not a paradox - it’s a conundrum. It’s not just that the person saying it is part of the first group, but that they necessarily are.

Since people want to believe that they “know better,” there’s a strong urge to count oneself among the second group, which immediately places one in the first.

There are two kinds of people in the world - those who think there are two kinds of people in the world and those who know better.

Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

I deliberately avoided having kids and I don’t have any particular existential dread, so I’m just sort of sitting back and bemusedly watching it all play out. I just read the latest bit about one or another obscenely wealthy and/or powerful blatant psychopath doing or saying something gibberingly insane and I marvel yet again at the fact that the world is run by literal lunatics and nobody seems to even notice.

And when it stops being cynically amusing, I shut it off and go do something else.

What the fuck are you on about?

It’s not necessarily the case though that fewer crimes are being actually “solved,” in the most precise sense of the term.

It could be that the current heightened interest in police oversight and focus on investigation of (and huge lawsuit payouts as a consequence of) wrongdoing by the police has made it less likely that people will be railroaded/framed for crimes they didn’t actually commit, so the rate at which crimes are marked as solved has declined, even as the rate at which they actually are solved hasn’t.

That’s everything I said, right there. What part of it are you not understanding?

evidence is necessary. otherwise, it’s just speculation

Of course it’s fucking speculation! What the fuck else did you think it was?!

i didn’t expect equivocation

It would be equivocation if there was a disjunct between the intended meaning of what I said at one point and the intended meaning of the same thing at some other point.

But I’ve been entirely consistent in what I’ve said. The disjunct is between what YOU thought I meant and what I actually said, and that’s your fucking problem - not mine.

Eh?

I said that it’s “not necessarily the case that” one thing and “it could be that” something else.

Logic and plausibilty are all that’s necessary.

It struck me after I posted that that modern technology and investigative techniques would also contribute to such a decline.

It’s undoubtedly more difficult to falsely convict someone (whether deliberately or not) in the era of GPS, cell phone records, video surveillance and DNA tests.

It’s not necessarily the case though that fewer crimes are being actually “solved,” in the most precise sense of the term.

It could be that the current heightened interest in police oversight and focus on investigation of (and huge lawsuit payouts as a consequence of) wrongdoing by the police has made it less likely that people will be railroaded/framed for crimes they didn’t actually commit, so the rate at which crimes are marked as solved has declined, even as the rate at which they actually are solved hasn’t.

I guess by that I use fingertip, but I think it’d be more accurate to say that I use palm adapted for big hands.

The few times that I’ve had a mouse big enough to palm it without my fingers sticking out too far, that’s what I’ve done, and that’s definitely my preference. It’s just that the vast majority of mouses are too small for that.

What the fuck?

Even setting aside the cultural/religious issues, didn’t the US outgrow this ludicrous obsession with boys’ hair like 50 years ago?

I saw in another article too that after they admitted that it had in fact happened, they claimed that the problem was that Media Matters had made it seem to be more common than it in fact was.

The reality of course is that MM just reported that it had happened. And used-to-be-twitter has already admitted that much.

So yeah - they’re going to get their asses handed to them in this lawsuit.

The problem though is that we’re now in a timeline in which the fascism-adjacent demagogues who support Musk are so invested in their narrative that they’re going to view the failure of the lawsuit as some sort of contrarian proof that it was justified. To them, it’s not going to fail because MM’s accusation was in fact legitimate, but because “blah blah blah deep state something something great replacement yadda yadda woke mob.”

…launched what he called a “thermonuclear lawsuit” against Media Matters, which accused it of artificially manipulating the social network’s algorithms to achieve the contentious juxtapositions (while admitting that they had in fact occurred).

This is my favorite part of this whole story.

It’s like the narcissist’s prayer directly translated into a lawsuit.

I was just thinking the other day that it’s about time to replay this game. So I guess it is.

I prefer “used-to-be-twitter.” I think it captures the context better, and it’s clunky, as it should be.

Of course they are - they’re psychopaths.

They’re each and all people who, in a sane society, would be institutionalized in order to protect others from the harm they inevitably do as a consequence of their complete lack of principles, morals, empathy and remorse. But instead they’re allowed to run free, and this is what we get.

Of course they do - that’s the point.

And it doesn’t matter in the slightest that there’s no substance to any of their allegations, because the entire purpose is just to get the idea that there’s something there to investigate out into the world.

And it’ll likely work, no matter what, because Republican voters are angry morons, so all they’re going to get no matter what is “investigate the Jan. 6 investigators because [words],” so it really doesn’t matter if those words make sense or not.