RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
No bio...
User ID: 317
With regard to point 1, I believe in the power of Straight Lines on the graph. Moore's Law and it's corollaries in flops/$ are remarkable, unprecedented achievements that are continuing unto this day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_point_operations_per_second#Cost_of_computing
This time it's different, digital environments are exceptions to the usual rules on growth. The internet didn't take 200 years to catch on, a computer virus doesn't need months to breed.
Intelligence is a problem that can be approached by 20 watt processors assembled with whatever proteins are lying around and coordinated by extremely lossy, low-bandwidth interlinks. Gigawatts and kilotonnes of liquid-cooled processors should be more than enough to overwhelm the problem.
The thuggishness and inelegance of the present approach feels right to me. We never figured out how birds or bees fly for our own flying machines, we never replicated the efficiency of ants in construction, never achieved symbiosis or oneness with the universe that let us live in harmony with nature.
We smashed flight with oil, aluminium and combustion engines. We paved over the ants with concrete and steel. We exterminate with pesticide. Smashing obstacles with scalable, ugly resources is how you win, not with sleight of hand or some deft intellectual performance. We celebrate the triumph of intellect but rely on leveraging force 98% of the time. Throw rocks at it until it dies, light fires to herd them off a cliff, mobilize enough drafted farmers and produce enough iron swords till you conquer your foes.
Advancing AI by throwing more compute at the problem, more R&D talent making incremental algorithmic improvements in parallel, more and better-sifted data (human or synthetic) and self-play per the Absolute Zero papers is the way to go. I sense that some people (Yann LeCun certainly) are waiting for some fundamental advancement as a sign that we've truly made it, some electric inspirational paradigm-changing moment where we finally know what the hell we're actually doing, understand the secrets of intelligence. But that never worked for chess, we forced it with compute and search, simple scaling techniques. You don't have to understand Go like a grandmaster, just find a way to throw firepower at the problem with reinforcement learning and self play, then you can snap grandmasters like twigs. Nobody understands how LLMs work, you don't need to really understand them to make them.
The hard work is already done, we already found the breakthroughs we need and now just need to apply more inputs to get massively superhuman results but in all areas of human achievement. It really is that simple: flight speed, payload and range isn't capped at some modest multiple above a falcon but by how much fuel you're prepared to burn and whether you're willing to use serious, atomic rockets. We already have very strong AI capabilities in a bunch of diverse sectors - cartoon drawing, coding, mathematics, locating places from images. Scale gets results.
The entirety of modern civilization is premised on the fact that we can dig coal out of the ground and burn it, boiling water and making power - this silly-sounding process scales nicely and lets you dig more coal faster and cheaper. If we can turn power into thought we can hook up our strongest scaling factor into another even more promising scaling factor and the results should be surreally potent. We're already living extremely different lives from the vast majority of our ancestors, AI should absolutely make a huge difference very soon since it works more along digital timeframes than analogue ones. I believe by 2027 the doubters should be silenced one way or another.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
Even before ChatGPT many humanities students were super-lazy and didn't bother to do even a very dumbed down amount of work. Nor were they prepared to put even a mild effort into pretending they'd done so. If they ask you to read a huge amount of text, you can just read some of it looking for a question based on that info to ask, ask the question and it'll seem like you've done the reading. But there were many who couldn't even be bothered with that, even when the lecturer tacitly encouraged us to do it.
It was quite awkward when someone from outside uni came in as a guest teacher and expected students to actually do significant amounts of reading for a course.
People go to university as a cultural ritual, I only really learned anything from one unusually hard course.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
I think that American complaints over Trump are warranted but disproportionate, that's why I spent so much of that post comparing to foreign countries.
The Australian government works in a totally responsible, law-abiding, careful and considered way like you're calling for. But the results are a complete disaster and there's no obvious way to fix it. This is paywalled but it tells you the story in the http address.
Productivity is in the doldrums. Energy prices are rising despite the government's promises, the only thing they successfully did is provide subsidies for power to make the price seem lower. All major cities are ludicrously unaffordable and more people are constantly imported to make it even more unaffordable. Industry is a shambles, we're constantly bailing out what little remains due to the terrible energy policy. To top it all off they've proposed unrealized capital gains tax on superannuation, there's nothing they won't stoop to.
And the Labour government that oversaw all of this just got their biggest majority ever for seeming to be less like Trump than Peter Dutton's Liberals... who weren't really like Trump in any significant sense and basically offer the same thing as Labour albeit slightly moderated. There's no way out of this mess.
There are way worse things that could happen to the US than tariffs or Trump, you could have a deepseated economic crisis at a structural level, not a mild stock market shock that's easily undone at the executive level.
The EU loves stable, boring governance. But just being stable and predictable doesn't work very well if you're stably and predictably doing the wrong thing all the time, that's why the US is rich and relevant while the EU is not.
Stability and effectiveness is of course good. Australia did a good job of blocking illegal immigration. Violent crime is still fairly low despite the best efforts of the drug legalizers and policing reformers. But the hierarchy should be:
- Stable and wise (lee quan yew)
- Chaotic but more or less wise (Trump)
- Stable but unwise (George W Bush, Clinton, Obama, EU, Australia)
- Chaotic and unwise (Pol Pot as an extreme example)
Without Trump, there's a decent chance that the net closes and it becomes effectively impossible to contest the deep-seated institutions and lobbies that want to wreck the economy so they can maximize their control and security, turn the US into the EU, shut off any dissent as hate-speech... Before Trump, what legal victories were there where people convinced others to moderate the madness? Were there many such victories? Were they permanent wins or temporary compromises? The net is closing in the EU, they're moving slowly to ban the AFD and any alternative to managed democracy and permanent decline/replacement. Vote poorly in Romania and your election will simply be undone.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
hence that the only way to stay competitive is by appealing to the fantasies of the gross fetishistic perverts
AI video fixes this. There is no way for women to compete against the outright physically impossible fetishes and perversions you can find on the /gif/ threads. Nor can they compete on convenience, speed or price when it comes to video/photos. Much of the 'texting/relationship simulacrum' stuff is outsourced to the subcontinent anyway, it can easily be outsourced to AI.
And yes, I know that "AI" is still a misnomer, I understand that LLMs are just token predictors, and I think people who believe that any neural net is close to actually "thinking" or becoming self-aware, or that really, what are we but pattern-matching echolaliac organisms? are drinking kool-aid
But you then go on to talk about how its helpful to you, how it can do art and coding and stuff. Doesn't that mean it's thinking? What is thinking if not intellectual labour that produces some kind of useful output?
See the cartoons here: https://x.com/emollick/status/1920700991298572682
How are these not proper newspaper-tier cartoons? It's not just pattern-matching, see the Cthulhu ones. How does that not require some kind of thought? If thought isn't required to make them, then so much the worse for thought. They're more amusing than many actual New Yorker cartoons.
It cannot build a fully functional application (beyond the simplest) by itself, though.
What model are you talking about? When you say ChatGPT, that could be GPT4omini. It could be GPT4o. It could be o3-mini, o1-pro, o4-mini-high, GPT4.5 (RIP). OpenAI does a very good job at confusing people here but there are major differences between 'slop for free' and 'serious compute for the subscribers'.
With a lot of finnagling and wrangling, I can make Sonnet 3.7 produce a fully functional application with a database, logging, UI (admittedly not a fantastic UI), user authentication... It's not exactly simple, maybe 8000 lines of code, some quite long and complex functions. I'm nontechnical. It does need my human wisdom and feedback but nonetheless, it's writing all the code. And while the code isn't perfect, it is fully functional.
I detect a fair bit of warranted snobbishness from those initiated in the tech world about AI. Yes, there are a bunch of idiots making simple apps on localhost:5000 and not even knowing what that means or why their bros can't click the link. Yet there is also unwarranted snobbishness. There are people making real projects with AI alone and earning revenue. See levelsio on twitter, he was making money with his multiplayer plane game thing. It's not a AAA game but it shows that this isn't just a toy.
See also this one-shot coding challenge from gemini, this isn't exactly simple stuff: https://x.com/elder_plinius/status/1922126885783281755
It has no way to embed themes and metaphors that echo throughout a book, it has no thematic consistency (often not even tonal consistency)
I observed Sonnet 3.6 inserting themes in a story unprompted, it was a noticeable difference from 3.5. Not amazing themes but themes consistently and consciously referenced nonetheless.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
But rumors are coming out that it's manufacturing sector in panicking, with factories sitting idle and orders drying up.
There have been rumours like this for the last 10 years at least. Remember Evergrande?
Obviously the tariffs hurt the Chinese economy but it's the biggest manufacturer in the world, the biggest trading nation in the world and the biggest economy in the world in terms of production as opposed to accounting tricks. Energy in the US is more expensive than China - higher US GDP! Burger King has been selling burgers at US $1.37 in China, there's a massive price war in just about everything. Lower China GDP! When you use appropriate metrics for economic size, China surpassed the US a long time ago.
Thus I'm sceptical of the China-collapse narrative. Big things are tough and hard to break. COVID hit China pretty hard but they tanked it and moved on without any inflation. Tariffs aren't going to do more economic damage than COVID.
By the time demographic shrinking really kicks in, they'll have a gigantic, automated industrial base and still enjoy a huge pool of STEM talent. Nothing short of losing WW3 is going to stop China.
So of course there will be factories that are hard hit and go out of business. But China is not short of factories, they have huge capacity. During the Great Depression the US was in a very poor state but they were still the biggest economy on the planet. Likewise with China, except they're not in a Great Depression.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
Though on the other hand, we might end up remembering having this kind of culture spanning, unifying narrative as kind of comfy compared to total balkanization
Since it's being used as a cudgel against anyone who isn't all on board the multiculturalism and diversity express (or a rhetorical device to back up any Israeli foreign policy strategem), then away with it!
The narrative isn't so highly energized because of objective historical reasons: the Mongols celebrate Genghis Khan as a national hero. The Turks and Algerians couldn't care less about the atrocities they committed, slave-trading, slave-raiding and genocide. Mao and Stalin have mixed but vaguely positive receptions in their countries. The Hitler narrative is there to achieve a political result in the contemporary world, to justify the high and growing costs of this system and military adventurism.
Looks like I was clearly wrong with an earlier 'this will probably blow over' Thursday post.
Still, did a cyberattack really take down the grid? India says it's fake news while 'Mashriq news' says it did but wouldn't we be able to see it from space? My Brave AI bot says it was real but I don't think these browserbots are up for wars and the absolute explosion of fake news that comes with it. The beginning of the war in Ukraine was like this too, lots of fantasy.
For those who have twitter accounts, see the discourse on the Chinese PL-15 - it fell out of the sky, it shot down Rafales, it's too short to be a real PL-15, China gave Pakistan the real version not the shitty export version, no they didn't... and the chaos is automated too with convincing and effective Deepseek instances too, I spotted at least one batting for China with a non-trivial follower count.
https://x.com/search?q=PL-15&src=trend_click&vertical=trends
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
Subsequent writings are merely of the 'adding more epicycles' kind of truthseeking. First it was literally believing that men were created by God ex nihilo. Then Darwinism came around and showed this wasn't the case. So they just retreat back to 'OK fine evolution is real but God created all things and the individual soul is not produced by material forces'. There's no substantial change to the practical doctrine of blankslatism, they move on just as before with zero regard for skepticism or evidence.
The soul? You may as well go to Pakistan and pursue cutting edge research into the powers of djinn.
Likewise with the Epicurean argument. They created an entire discipline of theodicy to cope with it and still fail. Free will? Natural disasters have nothing to do with free will. And 'free will' itself is becoming more and more of an illusion, we are today capable of creating benign and malevolent digital beings. So too is God. God could've set the median level of aggression lower or altered incentives to produce more sympathy. There is no free will in front of an omnipotent who establishes the context, permits what genes come into existence or what genes even are.
Grand plan? Maybe Satan runs the world and has a grand evil-maxxing plan that tolerates good for greater evil... Or it's just outright incomprehensible. That works just as well.
Here's another one I found:
We are in world that is a state of journeying. For this world in a state of journeying to exist and be self-sustaining, it must follow the laws of nature. I would argue that since these laws are so intimately and intricately related, it would be impossible for a journeying world to exist if just one minor thing was changed. That is, these laws of nature are the only way in which this journeying world can naturally sustain itself. If God were to change just one law, everything else would be thrown off and it would become unsustainable. In his work, Fr. Robert Spitzer, SJ, has discovered that if during the Big Bang, the gravitational constant or weak force constant varied from their values by an exceedingly small fraction (higher or lower) – one part in 10^50 then either the universe would have suffered a catastrophic collapse or would have exploded throughout its expansion.
An omnipotent God can write the laws of Nature, Genesis describes this. The universe could run on the fuzzy principles of a human dream, not thermodynamics. You could have a physics of wishing or Daoist cultivation to immortality, Aristotelian physics or Harry Potter. All of that is simple for an omnipotent.
No matter what they try, the Epicurean trilemma still snuffs them out. And this is the key thing, the question of mindset I bring up at the start. They don't like the Epicurean Trilemma and so come up with some comforting story that fails if you look at it too closely, they never review their priors about the nature of God.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
But at the risk of going full "boo outgroup," can I just say--I really, really hate crowdfunding? It seems like a horrible mistake, a metastasized version of the cancer of social media, virtue signaling with literal dollars that feed nothing but further grift.
As a matter of principle, I do not give money via crowdfunding. I don't even use Patreon, much less GoFundMe or GiveSendGo or whatever. I regard it as a moral failing when I see others do so, no matter how apparently worthy the cause.
Really? You've never benefitted from someone's freely accessible work and considered giving them a donation? What about this website? I am not paying to keep the servers up because I think I'm poorer than the average user and there is enough money in the pot but I don't think it's morally wrong for those who do! There are 20 people who are paying so the rest of us can enjoy something for free.
https://www.patreon.com/themotte/about
And in the general case, how is crowdfunding bad? Some are scammers but some are deserving. How are poor/niche games or webnovels supposed to be paid for? Just stick up a paywall?
Christianity isn't so much about 'things being true' but getting into a mindset where 'it doesn't matter if it's true or not, I believe it'. Christian theology is a complete mess because they go in with the answer in mind and then come up with justifications. They just make up all kinds of nonsense about 'free will' requiring everyone to suffer because of a snake and an apple. Or there being a great plan that requires Christians to suffer and get wrecked by huge natural disasters beyond their ability to handle. Omnipotence and benevolence does not require there to be random earthquakes and tsunamis that destroy you, it's pure cope to think that there's a plan behind it all or that 'this is the best of all possible worlds'. Theologians have spent thousands if not millions of man-years justifying this stuff but still hard-lose to the Epicurean argument because there is no satisfactory answer.
OK, you can be perfectly happy as a Christian ignoring these abstract issues and have a decent life which is better than can be said for many modern ideologies. Thousands of years have been spent turning the silliness into metaphors and capitalizing on the strengths, rationalizing and streamlining the religion.
But all that is ironically enough built on a foundation of sand. Once people realize that the astronomy and history is all wrong, the philosophy is silly, the predictions are wrong, the blankslatism and universal equality of iron-age institution-building isn't so relevant given modern technologies and culture... they also move on from the good elements of Christianity, the prohibition on incest and the well-functioning family structures. The solution is not to return to Christianity but to move on and do the hard work of getting ideology that actually fits with reality. This is extremely difficult and dangerous work but necessary nonetheless.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
so even though the WorldCon committee is insisting there has been no use of generative AI
What do they mean by this? Generative AI includes AI that generates text... How can you have a Perplexity style search system without generative AI? Generative AI is a silly term IMO, what they really mean is LLMs or New-style AI to distinguish it from Eliza or the simple algorithm-based AI in computer games.
Double irony if they don't understand technical terminology in their luddite frenzy.
Does China even have much IP to steal? The key to their success primarily seems to be 'maximize inputs (skilled labour, R&D talent, state support) and throughput efficiency (massive industrial scale, quick manufacturing/prototyping stage, cheap energy)' rather than 'discover special secrets that let you achieve qualitatively higher quality products'.
The US knows the 'secrets' of building the Three Gorges Dam or Huawei or BYD. You just need a huge amount of concrete and construction workforce and the freedom to move whole cities out of the flooded areas. Or you just need a huge, clever, motivated workforce, cheap energy and well-targeted long-term state support. The US has versions of Huawei/BYD in the Magnificent Seven but struggles at the cost-efficiency stage due to lacking the needed inputs at the necessary scale.
China State Shipbuilding Corporation is just worlds ahead of the US, you'd need a Meiji Revolution to match them there, the necessary inputs just don't exist in America. There's no secret - big shipyards go brrr and produce a third of the world's ships... but replicating it is quite impossible for the US.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
I heard it was a Mirage 2000...
But agree 200% on the importance of skepticism at this point in the conflict.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
I rarely use ChatGPT compared to Claude or Deepseek so I can't recognize it that well, it felt a little Deepseek to me but then Deepseek is a fair bit like ChatGPT and one hardly expects US military commentators to use Deepseek. Deepseek gives me stuff like:
Silence.
Then—pandemonium.
Or:
The road to the Black Tower was long.
And her vengeance?
Beginning.
Slop!
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
Has everyone else been seeing this kind of cadence, short sentences and contrasting statements? I keep seeing this and thinking AI. How do others see it? Do you think it's suddenly become more prominent too?
The plan was smart:
•ISVs to move rifle squads quickly
•LRVs to give Cavalry squadrons mobility and sensors
•M10 Bookers to restore firepower to the dismounted fight. It wasn’t perfect, but it made the IBCT relevant again.
Now the Army has canceled the M10. The LRV is nowhere in sight. And what’s left? An “MBCT” concept with no protected firepower, no recon platform, and a few light vehicles. This isn’t transformation. It’s disarmament.
The M10 solved a real problem. So did the LRV. Killing the platforms without replacing the capability isn’t reform. It’s regression.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
It's literally Orwellian. I keep seeing these screenshots with even less naughty words like 'retard' but they've MS Painted so the word isn't clear enough for bottom-quality OCR. The world is turning into Roblox where you have to tell people to 'game-end' themselves since kill is too edgy. What use is free speech if they just take the words instead?
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
Yeah, I had the exact same thought. Nobody thinks of the Saudi prince as 'polyamorous'.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
On the one hand I agree totally that asking a girl to dance shouldn't be anything like slaying a dragon... but they're still not doing it according to Michael Foster.
On the other hand, I think this is precisely the wrong idea. Young men go through their consent training in school and/or have the message sink in culturally, don't be creepy or whatever... Then they're to be gossiped about if they don't approach - 'don't be such a pussy loser, man up and ask her to dance'? There's already lots of that. I imagine that this room was full of immense awkward tension. Didn't work.
The logical conclusion from this mixed messaging is just not to attend dances.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
It wasn't supposed to be a thorough analysis (who can thoroughly investigate such a huge topic?), though I guess that this line was a little pathetic as a qualifier when I spend the rest of my words saying the opposite: "Obviously there are many exceptions and many people who are perfectly happy in relationships."
Love is powerful but its strength is finite and its effectiveness context-dependent, that's what I'm trying to get at. There are going to be easier and harder environments to fall in love and have that work out. People are still capable of falling in love but we live in a society that redirects or suppresses much of that energy. Consider the simps moderating Pokimane's twitch chat for free or sending their money to onlyfans girls who provide a (often outsourced to low-paid Pakistani men) simulacrum of a relationship with a woman. On the female side there are those who fall into a Stockholm syndrome like infatuation with their rapist/abuser. That's a kind of love but it's not quite what we're talking about, it's not achieving what it's supposed to be and it's pretty pathetic. Circumstances matter.
"Don't people love their country, why aren't they joining the army?"
Some people of course love their country and will fight and die for it regardless. But money and glory help get others over the line and keeps them in the trenches. Being assured that you won't be prosecuted for war crimes helps. Adventure helps. Watching people die writhing from FPV drones hurts... Siegfried Sassoon poems hurt... Chaotic military bureaucracy hurts... Seeing other people boo veterans, support the enemy and flout the draft hurts...
And people come to love their country less and less if the latter is more prevalent.
I like this reply since it has a little edge to it, but I am left wondering, to what extent does empathizing with young men just translate to validating their crippling anxiety and fear over interacting with the opposite sex? Does that do them any good? To me a lot of the replies about fear of getting 'cancelled' just seem like an overblown and hyperbolic expression of that anxiety and fear.
I think it's about cost-benefit ratios. Suppose you're an adventurer going out to slay a monster. Maybe you'll go for a band of goblins for 40 gold pieces, or a dragon for 1000 gold pieces, a knighthood and universal fame. You wouldn't go out to slay a dragon for 40 gold pieces not because you're cowardly but because the risks and dangers aren't worth the reward.
Young men are notorious for being the bravest and most fearless. Young men do the fighting and dying in war and crime, they found startups and create new things for good or ill. So long as the incentives match up, young men are perfectly prepared to take risks.
I think the incentives don't match up for the bulk of young men to go out wooing girls like they used to. The status of being a boyfriend is fairly low, there are semi-common complaints about going out on a date being like a job interview (in other words a humiliation ritual/interrogation). There are significant financial costs maintaining relationships. There are cultural expectations that the man mustn't do anything wrong like sleeping with a drunk girl while drunk or approaching in the wrong ways and these are strong expectations, a huge amount of power is going into 'don't be a creep/sex pest'. There's a huge political divide between the sexes these days, it's semi-commonly expected for the man to lie about his true beliefs.
Moving on to marriage, again the status of the husband is not very high. He is not really the man of the house unless there's a burglar or something. Marriage is not 'till death do us part'. There is not really much he can do about nagging or a dead bedroom except an expensive divorce. As far as the legal system is concerned, he is clearly the second parent when it comes to raising (incredibly expensive if done the high-status way) children. Possibly the third parent, behind the state education system. And there's all kinds of media that presents the husband as a loser/fool while the wife is strong and wise.
My point isn't so much the classic 'porn cheaper' discourse so much as it's a matter of status and respect manipulation. Of course it's easier and safer to stay at home and not go out to war. But the status of warriors used to be kept very high, people would sing songs about the glory and valour of these proud defenders of the fatherland. And once he reached the front, there was cameraderie and morale, a mission to achieve that kept him fighting even through death and disease. Militaries are underrated as social institutions, they did an amazing job getting people to do things one would naively imagine to be impossible.
It's not just "Why looks-max, develop game, get fit at the gym, develop hobbies that bring one into contact with women without actively seeming lecherous, learn to interpret these complex semi-passive signals, woo a woman, take her out on appropriate dates and wield good sexual skills... when I have Biggus Tittus from anime, custom-tailored to appeal to me for free?"
The key thing is status here. Many would do all those costly things to end up in a high-status position. Look at South Korea, they exam-max super hard to get into Samsung and the opportunity to work even harder competing with the other elite rat-race enthusiasts. Then there are the gigachads who sleep with hundreds of women, that's a high status position in our culture. Of the looksmaxxing high-effort young men, I expect that's more their goal than the socially desirable 'loyal productive monogamous husband'. They're not going to do all that for a low-status position. Incels aren't satisfied with Biggus Tittus the anime girl or even a prostitute, they want status and respect.
Obviously there are many exceptions and many people who are perfectly happy in relationships. However, I think more effort needs to go into nerfing the dragon (making relations between the sexes less tense) and/or buffing the reward (making married men higher status, not just in cheap words of conservative speeches but real privileges).
"Don't be such a pussy, go kill that dragon on minimum wage" isn't going to cut it.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
The mods aren't upset about language so much as meaning. I too have a low opinion of Fuentes, he's like a lower-class Richard Spencer but normal people have a blessed ignorance of this eceleb lore that should be cherished and preserved where possible. They can't be expected to know about these guys.
'The gamer word'
Is that needed here of all places? We're not on reddit anymore. The considerable efforts of the admins are wasted if nobody uses the fruits of their labour, one of which is use of language that would rack up bad-boy points on other websites regardless of context.
Far be it for me to police the language of a post about language-policing but really, if we're talking about the word 'nigger' then this should be made clear.
As a more substantive point, the donations for both Karmelo Anthony and Shiloh's have both been censored now, though this hasn't stopped people doing the funny 'make username of N' trick to spell out nigger that 4chan loves so much. Some of the comments: https://x.com/tsarlet2/status/1918360755977748550
Clearly givesendgo wanted to suppress that kind of thing while retaining a certain perception of even handedness. There was plenty of time to censor the 'fuck white people' genre of donation comments earlier.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
5mo ago
But if you wipe out the capital cities, then what is the point of the Liberal Party or Labour? Can't prop up housing market if the houses are vaporized!
Seriously, I don't understand the result at all. I guess everyone decided the economic meltdown wasn't Albanese's fault and that his promise to lower power prices (when they then rose) was fine at the time. Or perhaps it's demographics = destiny time.
Bizarre how Reform seems to have ignored the anti-anti-incumbent trend, they're somehow not tarred by association with Trump despite Farage being closer to Trump than most.
How are are the old paying their taxes in the USA? The US is still in a huge $1.8 trillion budget deficit because of the entitlement spending. Tariffs are not going to produce that much revenue.
I'm all for cancelling the pension and laying waste to the baby boomers but it's not happening in the US or anywhere else until we hit a truly massive crisis. We still live under BOG.
More options
Context Copy link