[-] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

Wheel of Time

[-] [email protected] 4 points 4 days ago

Trump is spending more on ICE than other countries spend on their entire military

[-] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago

It's not allowed.

There's only one opinion on AI allowed on social media: It's the worst thing to ever happen and produced by stealing from starving child artists. The ouput is somehow simultaneously the worst quality imaginable with no redeeming qualities and also about to put every creative out of a job by next quarter.

The fact that you don't hold this opinion tells everyone what a horrible person that you are for not knowing the right opinion to have.

Enjoy being downvoted out of the conversation between tech illiterate children who believe everything they're told and tech illiterate creatives who haven't found a hyperbole that they cannot employ in their Luddite quest to stop advanced linear algebra

[-] [email protected] 10 points 5 days ago

I'm pretty sure I look exactly the same at work

[-] [email protected] 25 points 6 days ago

The memo, published on 11 June, calls on attorneys in the department to institute civil proceedings to revoke a person’s United States citizenship if an individual either “illegally procured” naturalization or procured naturalization by “concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation”.

Ironically, this exactly describes Elon Musk's situation where he was misrepresenting that he was on a student visa while he was working on a startup. Which would be a willful misrepresentation and grounds to have his citizenship revoked.

It's also a blank check to selective enforcement when any material fact discrepancy can be investigated and used to target any recent immigrants.

[-] [email protected] 77 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

This research is good, valuable and desperately needed. The uproar online is predictable and could possibly help bring attention to the issue of LLM-enabled bots manipulating social media.

This research isn't what you should get mad it. It's pretty common knowledge online that Reddit is dominated by bots. Advertising bots, scam bots, political bots, etc.

Intelligence services of nation states and political actors seeking power are all running these kind of influence operations on social media, using bot posters to dominate the conversations about the topics that they want. This is pretty common knowledge in social media spaces. Go to any politically charged topic on international affairs and you will notice that something seems off, it's hard to say exactly what it is... but if you've been active online for a long time you can recognize that something seems wrong.

We've seen how effective this manipulation is on changing the public view (see: Cambridge Analytica, or if you don't know what that is watch 'The Great Hack' documentary) and so it is only natural to wonder how much more effective online manipulation is now that bad actors can use LLMs.

This study is by a group of scientists who are trying to figure that out. The only difference is that they're publishing their findings in order to inform the public. Whereas Russia isn't doing us the same favors.

Naturally, it is in the interest of everyone using LLMs to manipulate the online conversation that this kind of research is never done. Having this information public could lead to reforms, regulations and effective counter strategies. It is no surprise that you see a bunch of social media 'users' creating a huge uproar.


Most of you, who don't work in tech spaces, may not understand just how easy and cheap it is to set something like this up. For a few million dollars and a small staff you could essentially dominate a large multi-million subscriber subreddit with whatever opinion you wanted to push. Bots generate variations of the opinion that you want to push, the bot accounts (guided by humans) downvote everyone else out of the conversation and, in addition, moderation power can be seized, stolen or bought to further control the conversation.

Or, wholly fabricated subreddits can be created. A few months prior to the US election there were several new subreddits which were created and catapulted to popularity despite just being a bunch of bots reposting news. Now those subreddits are high in the /all and /popular feeds, despite their moderators and a huge portion of the users being bots.

We desperately need this kind of study to keep from drowning in a sea of fake people who will tirelessly work to convince you of all manner of nonsense.

[-] [email protected] 97 points 2 months ago

It wasn't as bad as some (2 dead, 6 injured).

He originally started with a shotgun but it jammed without firing a shot. He grabbed a pistol from his vehicle and fired into the bystanders.

Police were on scene quickly (FSU is always crawling with plain clothes officers and unmarked cars) and shot and wounded the shooter.

[-] [email protected] 125 points 2 months ago

I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.


You took an oath. Being afraid isn't an excuse.

We expect 19 year old soldiers to run into fire and destruction to honor their oaths. We expect no less from our elected representatives.

[-] [email protected] 106 points 3 months ago

Yeah, just to be clear. One of the targets hit was a residential high rise building. Local authorities are reporting over 50 people killed.

The target was one, alleged, terrorist and the building, according to the Houthi PC small group message log, was the building of the target's girlfriend.

So, the US just killed at least 50 civilians in order to kill a single target. Just to give you a rough idea of the kind of 'collateral damage' that is acceptable.

[-] [email protected] 81 points 3 months ago

Teslas famously don't use lidar because Musk declared that cameras were good enough. Reality disagrees, but reality owns no shares of Tesla.

-19
submitted 3 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

I'll just post my initial comment in the entirety since what happens is entirely predicted by my first comment.

The topic was trans athletes and, like with any hot button political issues, there are rigidly defined 'sides' that come with a list of things that you must profess.

These things are simply declared as not being open to discussion and if you challenge that declaration, ye power trippin' bastards rear their ugly head. This dogma is unhealthy in any community and the people who enforce it through social pressure, cyber bullying and mod powers are actively harmful.

As to demonstrate my point I continued with the conversation, responding in good faith to the people who attempted a conversation, right up until I was mass banned (which only took a few hours).

The first comment is here if you want to see the entire conversation or think I'm hiding some secret transphobic rants in my comment history: https://lemmy.world/comment/15496985

The Initial Comment

This is an issue that exposes some of the more dogmatic people in the movement.

It is as if there is a list of positions that you’re required to believe and if you disagree with any one of them you’re labeled a heretic (transphobic, in this case).

Sports and the fairness of competition is a complex issue even when you’re just talking about cisgender competitors:

Can a person use performance enhancing drugs to train and then get clean enough to test positive for a competition? It seems unfair, to me, for the other competitors if this is the case.

It isn’t an unfair statement to say that the physical performance of cisgender men is higher than that of cisgender women. This is why we have separate competitions for men and women.

The issue isn’t as simple as a choice between “Transgender people should be free, without question, to compete in any competition” or “Transgender people should not be allowed to compete as their gender”

Framing it in such a black and white manner is harmful behavior, no matter which position you take.

We need to understand how people’s bodies are affected and what advantages of disadvantages are obtained and then base the rule changes on objective data and not appeals to emotion or ideological bullying.

Fabricated Pretexts

The last thing I said on the topic (bold added), as there were already commenters insinuating that I'm secretly a transphobe rather than engaging in discussion, was:

Obviously the people arguing that trans people should never compete are ignorant, I’m not supporting that position. From the point of view of fairness in competition there has to be an objective answer that’s backed by objective tests.

Simply declaring that trans people are beyond reproach and that any attempts to quantify biological advantage are unfairly discriminatory and anyone asking these questions is a bigot isn’t helpful.

I include this because included in the reasons for the bans is: "Transphobia attempting to make excuses for trans exclusion from sports." This is completely misrepresenting what I said and what I believe in order to create a pretext for a ban.

And the power trippin' bastards come in with the sweeping community bans ([email protected], really?): https://lemmy.world/modlog?page=2&actionType=ModBanFromCommunity&userId=12926811

Conclusion

This kind of thinking is harmful to any community.

Labeling disagreement as bigotry is nonsense. Refusing to engage on a topic and using filters and bans to hide from people who don't perfectly align with your ideas is not how you make allies or educate people.

The people that do this are responsible for creating the impression that your communities are hostile and made up of extremists. Attacking allies because they don't fall in line without question is a blunder.

People with moderator powers should be held to a higher standard of responsibility and fabricating reasons for bans and mislabeling people as bigots is the ultimate abdication of that responsibility. These people are not interested in helping a community thrive, they simply want to be the ones with the power to strike out at people that they want to hurt regardless of the damage that it causes.

Thanks for coming to my TED talk (except you, [email protected], I pray you never learn how to exit vim)

[-] [email protected] 92 points 4 months ago

The optics of Musk addressing the room while Trump is disengaged are bad enough without simply making up things that are not there.

"Why is Elon Musk acting as the leader while Trump is disengaged" is a hard question for a reasonable person to deal with.

Saying "lol look at Trump sleeping" when that's obviously not what is happening, makes you come off as unserious and casts doubt on anything you say in the future.

Spreading misleading lies is not the way to engage with the world. (To those of you that are people and not disinformation bots/agents)

view more: next ›

FauxLiving

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 4 months ago