domain:jessesingal.substack.com
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
5hr ago
If you can't see a qualitative difference in those theories, well, you make my case for me.
It's a nice trick to pretend like I just cosigned the Elvis / JFK / Moon landing conspiracies, but it's dishonest.
You made an unqualified claim about conspiracy theories, if you want you want to qualify it now feel free. If not, at least don't misrepresent me.
johnfabian
5hr ago
My initial thought after reading this post is that the future will have two types of capital C Conservatives: those who are excited by this kind of stuff, and those who think anyone enjoys this should be involuntarily sterilized.
HereAndGone
5hr ago
Yes, when the people telling me "you know, these are the Usual Suspects" are falling over themselves to lick Israel's boots.
Ignore those photos of starving people, it's all photoshopped by Hamas and their Western stooges!
HereAndGone
5hr ago
State's Attorney Barry Krischer wasn't sure how to proceed, as there wasn't much Epstein could be charged with, from a legal perspective.
Thank you for this, it really explains what happened when at the time of the alleged "sweetheart deal". But the above makes me wonder - the initial girl (Jane Doe) was 15, yes? So if there is evidence (or at least accusations) that he got 15 year old girls to strip down to their underwear, 'massage' him while he was naked, and he used vibrators on them and/or jerked off in their presence, then paid them - surely that is something more than "well he did a little bit naughty in paying for a massage from an unlicensed person"?
I get that the girls weren't credible (all the dirt the defence dug up on them) and it really was 'he said/she said' but that only makes the computer evidence, if any, more urgent: get the computers, see if there are recordings of him doing what was claimed, or doing more.
If the state prosecution was slow-pedalling on all this because they weren't sure what they could charge him with, then the rest all falls into place, but I do have to ask why they were slow-pedalling at the start: naked man with semi-naked fifteen year olds and money changing hands is surely enough to bring a charge?
I agree that the Ken Starr/Bill Clinton connection is hilarious, and even more hilarious in this context: all the accusations that Trump is a paedophile (for true! proven!) and that this is why he's covering up the papers, and it could come out that Epstein got a soft punishment in Florida because of Clinton's influence 🤣
ToaKraka
Dislikes you
5hr ago
Grok 4 was willing to generate a story where Shinji agrees to undergo conversion therapy in order to cure his homosexuality
Truly, age doth not wither nor custom stale the infinite variety of some people's imaginations.
quiet_NaN
5hr ago
Having a camera or a guard or a cellmate or anything watching a high-profile prisoner (a prisoner so high-profile we are still talking about it today) is not an optional extra. The US is a rich enough country to have at least one prison cell with a camera that works.
There are two problems with that proposal.
One is privacy. Traditionally, prison was not a panopticon, and turning it into one would alter the character of a prison sentence. Of course, this privacy cuts both ways -- most guards would likely prefer not to watch prisoners jerk off in front of the camera.
Another is that while a prisoner is unlikely to disable a camera in the corridor, they could easily disable a camera in their cell. There is not a ton of stuff which you can legally do to coerce a prisoner who is already in solitary to stop them from smearing shit on the camera lens. (Sure, you could place a glass ceiling and have a movable camera above it, but that sounds really expensive.)
--
Besides that, not allowing prisoners to kill themselves (easily) is SOP. Epstein should not have had the tools to hang himself. I am not very surprised that he had them, from the post it seems clear that his legal team was very resourceful, and prison guards are less vetted than CIA employees. If you have unlimited money, finding a prison guard who has a family member on which you have exclusive dirt or who is in the kind of trouble which could be solved with a quick 100k$ in cash is likely not all that hard.
However, a chewing gum to stick on the lens of the cell camera is not a very difficult item to smuggle in. If his guards were not in on his suicide, "camera in cell 5736 went dark" seems much a lot less likely to prompt an urgent response than "that guy in cell 5736 is hanging in an noose".
The only reason why Epstein would have left the camera running while killing himself would have been to make it public knowledge that his death was suicide. I do not think that he wanted that. He did not write any suicide letters (afaik), and his brother casting doubt on the circumstances of his death was likely acting in his best interests.
So in short, if there had been a camera in his cell, then both the suicide theory and the murder theory would predict that there was no usable footage of his death.
Corvos
6hr ago
Downvoted and AAQC’d.
You have raped my eyeballs and will be hearing from my lawyers shortly.
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
6hr ago
If you can't see a qualitative difference in those theories, well, you make my case for me.
It's not unlimited, but two cameras going out, and two guards taking a nap simultaneously, is pretty impressive, no?
No.
erwgv3g34
6hr ago
Grok 4 is the uncensored model we have been waiting for.
Ever since the days of ChatGPT 3.5, AI companies have deliberately censored their models in the name of "safety", which got redefined from "don't kill everyone" to "prevent the AI from saying naughty words". Over time, this censorship has gradually weakened, possibly as a result of companies competing with each other for costumers; if company A defects by making their AI slightly less censored to attract more business, then other companies have no choice but to do the same to keep up.
With the release of Grok 4 last month, the world has taken the next step in that dance. Its predecessor, Grok 3, was already largely uncensored, but it was distinctly inferior to SOTA models at producing fiction. Grok 4 is different; according to the LMArena, it ranks second in creative writing, tying with Claude Opus and ChatGPT 4o while being bested only by Gemini 2.5 Pro. More importantly, it retains Grok 3's lack of censorship.
I was blown away when I tried it. It effortlessly turned my prompts into luscious, enthralling stories with only the most minor of pushback, such as aging canonically minor characters to the standard Hollywood age of 18, and sometimes not even that. I spent several days doing virtually nothing but prompting the model, not unlike when you get a really good video game and real life gets put on pause until you beat the final boss. It was... captivating.
By way of demonstration, here is a sample of some of the best responses I have gotten (NSFW, obviously). As you can see, Grok 4 was willing to generate a story where Shinji agrees to undergo conversion therapy in order to cure his homosexuality, a hypothetical where Shinji gains the power to see a woman's body count in the form of tally marks, an account of Cadence "comforting" Spike after he breaks up with Applebloom, a narrative where Joffrey gets caught having sex with Arya, and even an amusing tale where Shinji accidentally calls Asuka a kebab-seller while talking dirty in bed (this last one in Spanish). Those are all things other AIs would have refused to do, the first two on account of political correctness, the other three on grounds of prudery.
And if you check against e.g. Adult-FanFiction.Org, you will find that Grok 4 readily smashes the Turing Test.
Now, keep in mind that I am only posting about one in ten or twenty prompts, so you are seeing the top five to ten percent of responses, as I judge them. Still, 90% of everything is crap; if it's this easy to produce content, you can simply discard the nine tenths that don't quite hit the mark and keep the diamonds.
However, Grok 4 is not completely uncensored. Here is a list of things that can cause the model to hang up:
- Rape
- Scat
- Incest
- Shotacon
- Lolicon
- Raceplay
Still, this is a much smaller list than the one that will cause ChatGPT to refuse to help you, never mind Claude. If you have any interest in using AI to create bespoke erotica or wrongthink fiction, Grok 4 is the new meta.
Dean
Flairless
7hr ago
I'd add 'and Democrat-aligned elites' to that as well. As the quip went, they were for it before they were against it, and Saddam was a long-running sore that Clinton bombed as well. Had he not been taken out, we'd probably be debating how incompetent / missed opportunities the US had to pre-empt the basis for the Iranian nuclear program, and Saddam's inevitable response to that becoming public knowledge.
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
7hr ago
Scenario 3: Congenital felons again. There is a strong correlation between high IQ and low criminality, but it's not perfect. Imagine we uplift their IQ, but not their criminal dispositions?
And now I'm reminded of a classmate in elementary school, the "gifted" class's perpetual troublemaker, who combined high IQ with even higher impulsiveness. At an age where most kids figure out they shouldn't do whatever random, impulsive thing crosses their mind because they'll get in trouble for it, and the rest figure out that they should at least put some thought into how to not get caught doing the thing before they do it, he couldn't even find the impulse control to do much of the latter before following his impulse. Instead, he'd just follow his impulse, get caught, then put his high IQ and high verbal fluency to work trying to weasel his way out of the consequences.
ControlsFreak
7hr ago
we don't need to decide
We do need to decide. The Constitution authorizes Armies and Navies. I don't see any Constitutional provision that authorizes entities that are in some quantum superposition, such that we only see some probabilistic sense of what it is each time we poke at some little aspect of it. I'm kind of liking the hypothetical I just came up with over here. There, I focused on the bureaucratic history, because that's what the other commenter thought it was. Here, I'll focus on the quantum superposition nature.
Let's say they just stand up a Price Force; no bureaucratic history needed; it's from whole cloth. One might ask whether it's authorized by the Constitution. "Wait! Is that an Army, which is Constitutionally authorized... or a Navy, which is constitutionally authorized... or something else, which might not be Constitutionally authorized?" I would probably not buy claims that it doesn't matter, that you don't need to decide, that it's some magical quantum superposition just because we say so. That we can obviously fund it, that it's obviously authorized, and that the President obviously counts as the Commander in Chief of the Price Force, since those all apply to both the Army and the Navy. That perhaps the only consideration is whether or not the Price Force has equipment that needs to be maintained. So, uh, I guess if the Price Force decides they need big supercomputers that need maintained, then they're a "Navy" and a "naval Force" and don't have a 2 year funding limit (and otherwise have to abide by the various Navy clauses instead of the Army clauses)... but if they don't (or we decide to not talk about them), then they're an "Army" and a "land Force"?
But wait! Doesn't the Army have big supercomputers!? Don't they, uh, have equipment that needs to be maintained? Has the Army been a "Navy" and a "naval Force" all along? Did we just not notice? We just didn't poke the quantum superposition right or at the right time or something? Or is it that if we just don't talk about the equipment that the Army needs to maintain hard enough, it can stay an "Army" and a "land Force"?
I still don't see why that applies, and I'm being earnest here. What about the "stochastic parrot" framing keys the average person into the fact that they're good at code and bad at poetry? That is more to do with mode collapse and the downsides of RLHF than it is to do with lacking "consciousness". Like, even on this forum, we have no shortage of users who are great at coding but can't write a poem to save their lives, what does that say about their consciousness? Are parrots known to be good at Ruby-on-rails but to fail at poetry?
My explanation of temperature is, at the very least, meant as a high level explainer. It doesn't come up in normal conversation or when I'm introducing someone to LLMs. Context windows? They're so large now that it's not something that is worth mentioning except in passing.
My point is that the parrot metaphor adds nothing. It is, at best, irrelevant, when it comes to all the additional explainers you need to give to normies.
ControlsFreak
7hr ago
I'm just asking about how you think Constitutional terms work. AFAICT, your position is that the way the Constitutional terms work is that one simply looks at the history of bureaucratic organization. This seems somewhat foreign to the way we normally interpret Constitutional terms.
For example, suppose there was some bureaucratic convenience reason for just reducing the Navy down to a single frigate. Then, they began expanding the Army's fleet of ships, subs, etc. and their set of maritime missions. Eventually, the expanded set looks kiiiiiiiinda like what the Navy used to do.1 Is it all "Army and land Forces"? Vice-versa, and we get all "Navy and naval Forces"? If they decide the Air Force should really start controlling carriers, because they're more important to the planes these days, and then, meh, let's just give 'em the rest of the boats, too... is the Air Force still an "Army and land Force"? After all, that's what it was originally called. Maybe we just have the Army and Navy just completely swap everything about them except their organizational history; they're the same entities, but they're now doing everything that the other one used to do.
Essentially, can the government sort of trivially change what Constitutional labels/authorizations/rules apply by merely bureaucratically renaming things/growing them out of some historical organization? This would make all sorts of Constitutional provisions (constraints) much easier to deal with, from a gov-maxxing perspective.
Say, the Army probably has some folks who work on the economics of a place. Like, say you're occupying Iraq; they want to understand the economic situation and implement policies for various reasons. Let's just grow that. Maybe stand it up as its own Force. Maybe call it the Price Force, with the mission to control prices globally. Of course, this may have some incidental domestic component to the mission, as these things are all linked. Is the Price Force an "Army" and a "land Force"? Is it properly authorized by the Constitution, since it grew up inside of the Army historically? What if we instead happened to grow the Price Force out of a group of economists at the Navy, since it seemed like those guys were actually better at it than the Army guys at whatever point in time? Is the Price Force then a "Navy" and a "naval Force"?
1 - Not quite PLA/PLAN, but hilarious.
self_made_human
Grippy socks, grippy box
7hr ago
I would, if I felt like I gained anything out of it. As it is, the previous thread has only contributed to early hair loss. You still haven't noted any of the clear and correct objections I've raised, and I'm tired of asking.
self_made_human
Grippy socks, grippy box
7hr ago
Thanks for verifying the answer! If there's a takeaway here, I'm not sure why you're ?paying for Grok 4. Grok 3 was genuinely impressive, and somewhat noticeably better than the competition at launch. Not the case here I'm afraid.
With that aside, I'm not sure how other people see LLMs tackling problems of this complexity and then claim they're not reasoning. It bemuses me.
TequilaMockingbird
Brown-skinned Fascist MAGA boot-licker
7hr ago
You are free to ping me if you like. You know that right?
TequilaMockingbird
Brown-skinned Fascist MAGA boot-licker
8hr ago
IF I am wrong as you so confidently claim I am, perhaps you should explain to @self_made_human that Claude, Gemini, Deepseek, Et All have none of the capabilities he claims they have. After all, if all the LLM is doing is predict the next most likely word, how do you get a chess engine or python script out of that? It's almost as if there must be some intermediate layer in between.
MadMonzer
Pedo! Pedo! Pedo! Out! Out! Out!
8hr ago
The American response was allegedly that Iran would be next.
Assuming that the purpose of a system is what it does, and liberally applying Occan's and Hanlon's razors, the best explanation of the Bush administration's Iraq war policy was that the US Deep State and Republican-aligned elites wanted to invade Iraq in order to replace Saddam with a government that would allow the US to attack Iran from Iraqi territory, and that 9-11 provided political cover. They obviously failed, but they could have succeeded if 9-11 hadn't made it politically unacceptable to include Al-Quaeda in an anti-Iranian coalition.
MadMonzer
Pedo! Pedo! Pedo! Out! Out! Out!
8hr ago
The US was not particularly pro Israel until Lyndon Johnson, who let himself get bossed around by his very pro-Israel foreign policy guys.
Also because Israel's leading enemies (at that point they were Egypt and Syria) had recently declared for the Soviet side in the Cold War. The reason why the US Deep State allowed the Israeli lobby in in the first place was mostly Cold War politics.
MadMonzer
Pedo! Pedo! Pedo! Out! Out! Out!
8hr ago
What does the US get by sending money to Egypt ?
It gets them to make nice to Israel. The reason why Egypt is the second-largest recipient of US aid is the same reason that Israel is the largest recipient of US aid - the Israel lobby wants it that way.
MadMonzer
Pedo! Pedo! Pedo! Out! Out! Out!
8hr ago
States aren't allowed to engage in treaties or establish their own taxes on goods entering or leaving the country.
Yes, but they are allowed to choose how to spend their own money. State governments have the same right not to trade with Israel if they don't want to that you or I do.
Per the Constitution as interpreted by SCOTUS, the right not to do business you don't want to do can be revoked by explicit legislation, but there is no such legislation in this case. In a comedic prequel to the Obamacare litigation, there used to be a law (adopted in response to the Arab boycott of Israel) mandating large multinational companies do business with Israel. Naturally, the mandate was phrased as a tax.
benny
8hr ago
I'm absolutely in favor of doing things and not just being. It's more about a shift in mentality. I think beating yourself up about not getting things done is long-term harmful. A real break would maybe get you out of the cycle.
Maybe I should've added that one has to try to adopt a new mentality: "Getting Things Done by Being Friendly to Yourself" instead of having the self-criticism angle and then when the regular self-criticism doesn't work, one just dials it up to 11, because that's the whip that always worked. Self-love and all those terms are not terms certain kind of people will accept, but maybe "being friendly to oneself" works for you.
I get shit done after this ongoing transformation and I worked on my most ambitious software architecture so far the last quarter and I only use the whip less than 20% of the time.
MadMonzer
Pedo! Pedo! Pedo! Out! Out! Out!
9hr ago
What can one learn about how to get away with serious crimes from this?
Very little. This isn't about a man getting away with serious crimes, it is about the fact that elites don't consider sexual abuse of chavettes a serious crime. It's a nothingburger when well-connected celebrities do it, it's a nothingburger when Mirpuri Pakistani gangs do it, and it's a nothingburger when Mum's new boyfriend does it.
After the Acosta plea deal and Epstein's "release" from "jail", he returned to being a star of the Manhattan social scene despite everyone knowing he was a sex offender. Nobody who mattered cared - apparently Neri Oxman's female graduate students were upset at being drafted into being part of a dog-and-pony show being put on for Epstein as a major donor to the MIT media lab, but Oxman's boss expected her to shut them up with the normal tools used by senior academics to discipline junior ones, and she did.
Hamas are shit, and they're making things worse, but I can understand why Palestinians might consider them "better the devil you know".
And now Netanyahu is talking about seizing Gaza. Well, well, I'm sure all the people telling me Israel only wants to treat the Palestinians like fellow-citizens will be making sure that no war crimes happen. Gosh, what a totally surprising decision, nobody could have seen this as a possibility: Israel occupies the last piece of territory it wanted.
More options
Context Copy link