philosoraptor
No bio...
User ID: 285
philosoraptor
11d ago
That reason was just bad, as it excluded the option of "AF was confident in his interpretation, so he didn't ask".
Thus, my calling it "extremely weak circumstantial evidence". (It's not, for example, like he caught Arjin in a contradiction or anything like that.) I think we're agreeing on the basic facts and just assigning somewhat different descriptions to them.
philosoraptor
11d ago
but I do not believe this for reasons I explained in my other post
You did not explain your reasons for thinking he was lying, or at best you gave some extremely weak circumstantial evidence of this, before moving on to your main topic which was psychologizing about why. It was actually one of the better examples of Bulverism I've seen here.
philosoraptor
11d ago
To be absolutely clear and direct, I did not say, did not mean, and do not believe " if you think the "Braveheart" narrative is likely to be true, and remain unmoved by official government statements, it's because you hate brown people."
As a relatively neutral observer, I honestly have no idea how else your post can be interpreted. This just seems to be the straightforward meaning of your words. A lot of people seem to have come to that exact conclusion, and no-one - yourself included - has offered a plausible alternative reading. At the very least, your intended meaning and how it differs from what's quoted above is clearly nowhere near as obvious as you seem to think.
An explanation of what you did mean would be the obvious next step, well before calling people liars for believing the words in front of them meant what they appeared to say. Especially coming from a (soon-to-be-ex?) moderator.
philosoraptor
1mo ago
Are you endorsing @RandomRanger's claim that "There is no truth, only competing agendas" and that "There are no objective standards by which we can judge one culture better than another"?
No, I am telling you you're misreading that post very, very badly. That is not his claim, but his account (further elaborating on MWAM's) of what the postmodern-influenced keyboard activists in question believe in practise. (And also, between the lines but I may as well make it explicit now, that you need to calm down and take a few deep breaths...)
every statement you just made only reinforces @MonkeyWithAMachinegun's thesis.
Um... yes? That's the point? If this seems like a reasonable response to you, you're deeply confused about what that post is doing.
philosoraptor
2mo ago
I think my bigger question is: how the fuck is a company that was founded in 2011, and IPOed in 2017, employing over five thousand people while losing hundreds of millions of dollars per year, still in business?
It really seems like that's the deeper question here. Ever since ~2021, the economics of software companies have increasingly decoupled from the fundamentals that are supposed to describe a healthy business.
That's what a bubble looks like. It's not even the first one that industry has seen (partially) this century - remember the dot-com "boom"?
philosoraptor
2mo ago
(Unless you were a union worker in one of the industries Thatcher stopped subsidising, I suppose)
Um, she did a little more than "stop subsidizing" them.
philosoraptor
2mo ago
If nothing else it shows there's an important sense in which he was not a terrible politician but a very good one, contrary to the quoted text.
philosoraptor
2mo ago
At least in my experience, women are the first to claim that sex is not a big deal and discourage anything that shames promiscuity or a lack of self control.
I think this is one of those things that's true as long as the conversation remains abstract and unspecific, but frequently falls apart as soon as the conversation is about a concrete scenario the person is actually facing (or can imagine in a particularly vivid way). Kind of like "there's no reason women shouldn't be the ones approaching men rather than the reverse", most women agree in theory but freak out as soon as it's suggested they themselves put it into practise.
philosoraptor
2mo ago
Is there a "don't" or similar word missing near the end of that sentence?
philosoraptor
3mo ago
Trump kept his promise of no forever wars in his first term, and for most of his second term. The recent Iran action is an aberration
This is one of those "but you fuck one goat..." situations, though. The biggest difference by far is the jump from zero to one.
philosoraptor
5mo ago
Well, yes, what else can one do? "Here's my impressions from the video, here's an important question it leaves unanswered, here's the sort of evidence that would change my mind" is perfectly reasonable and I have no idea why you seem determined to describe it so uncharitably. It's more thoughtfulness than you'll see from the vast majority of people on social media.
A lot of people had to do dumb shit they shouldn't have done for Babbit's death to fall out of it, is what I take that person's point to be.
Pointing out that the police did something wrong doesn't require thinking the rioters were in the right. People have this zero-sum picture of how blame works that just doesn't correspond to reality at all. You see it from the other political direction in "victim-blaming" discourse - "maybe you shouldn't have dressed like that or gotten that drunk" does not mean "the guy who assaulted you did nothing wrong and you deserved it", but when people get emotional common sense gets left behind. In a lot of these situations, a lot had to go wrong, many people contributed to it, some of them doubtless behaved worse than others, but even so, it makes no sense to insist there is one and only party at fault.
philosoraptor
5mo ago
April Lavigne
Avril. I wouldn't bother if it was just once but you're both doing it, at least one consistently.
philosoraptor
5mo ago
It could have been more explicit but I think the idea was to draw an analogy between the academic journal and insider trading cases, as both being examples of the sort of thing he decries in the first part of the post - dishonorable behaviour being defended or even celebrated.
philosoraptor
5mo ago
to which to fatFIRE (or at least chubbyFIRE if I get all-so-tiresome'd out before getting there).
To what?
philosoraptor
5mo ago
I can only assume people are wildly misunderstanding what actually happened, though it seems to me the OP explains it quite clearly. There seems to be a lot of projecting of people's vaguely similar hobby horses going on.
Which is it? Either it's an image of her, or it's an AI generated image.
Disingenuous, unless you think the concept of, say, drawing a picture of Taylor Swift is incoherent. You can generally tell whether a picture is of Taylor Swift, and among people who know her the same is presumably true of this girl.
I don't see how having an AI do it instead of a human changes anything morally relevant; at the very least you need to make the case that it does. You seem to just assume it as a default, but I see no reason for doing this.
philosoraptor
5mo ago
Clearly it's possible to charge for both. Lesser included offences absolutely are a thing. You just can't convict for both, as I understand it (and I see a couple other posters who seem to have relevant backgrounds are agreeing with this interpretation).
philosoraptor
6mo ago
I provide it a ChatGPT report on sources and current events to ensure the references are clear.
This is the part I like the least for the tiny bit that's worth. ChatGPT hallucinates sources fairly regularly. And setting that aside, you shouldn't write (or let an AI write on your behalf) as though you could safely assume everyone is familiar with the sources, especially when you yourself wouldn't have been if not for the AI.
philosoraptor
6mo ago
I, Jedi is by Stackpole, one of the writers you praise, and is usually considered one of the best Legends novels.
philosoraptor
6mo ago
Same. TLJ took a lot of wind out of my sails, and so Solo is the only live-action Star Wars movie I've never seen in a proper theater, and TLJ and RoS are the only ones where I've only done so once.
philosoraptor
6mo ago
Doesn't that just further underscore ChickenOverlord's argument? The position he(?) is arguing against is that AI will somehow get better than any human at this, and CO is pointing out that as currently implemented, AI isn't really analyzing anything except language and so is unlikely to outperform the human-generated data it's trained on. Seems to me you're just giving a further reason to think the bar of what it can do is rather low.
philosoraptor
7mo ago
It's a good sci-fi idea in general. It would be a great fit in, say, Babylon 5. But I take the point to be that it's iffy at best whether it fits the Star Trek universe as established in the first few series and first ten or so movies.
Yes, I did. I made a few changes in the first few minutes, after realizing my initial version was much harder on Amadan than it needed to be and not really fair. And if you were responding to that version of my post, your response was wholly appropriate and captured some of the reasons I was editing it at that moment.
More options
Context Copy link