This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Something can wordy without being overly so. LLMs use lots of filler expressions. “But here is where the jurisdictional land-grab happens” - a very LLM-esque sentence, what does it mean?
It means "this is the place where the courts decided to make law rather than just rule on it".
More options
Context Copy link
I don't have a position on the general question, but "jurisdictional land-grab" is a pretty common expression in discussions of law. See here for a 2015 example on pages 2 and 4; here for 2014. I think the Waters of the United States rule popularized it as a more literal term-of-art than its historical use, but the only thing I can say, and with weak confidence, is that it was coined sometime after Kelo v. New London because otherwise the libertarians would have used it everywhere.
It's heavily focused on connotation, as normal "land grabs" in the resource extraction business world usually meant large-scale destruction of natural environment and/or displacement of peoples, but the applicability here isn't that much of a stretch. The state commanding internal behavior of religious, moral, and ethical institutions is something that was both initially disclaimed and completely replaces whatever moral codes those institutions were able to field on this particular matter.
((Conversely, this is probably the stronger argument for it being bad AI-gen: a remotely questioning approach with a 23B LLM and maybe a 7B one can give concrete examples of this process: CLS v. Martinez, Rotary Club of Duarte, Bob Jones University, these are not new cases.))
More options
Context Copy link
Those are what stood out to me, too. If I had to bet, I would easily bet that either this comment was AI generated, had significant AI generation with minimal human editing, or was intentionally human-written to appear AI generated, almost purely based on multiple paragraphs starting with:
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link