I mean yeah, there’s no question that extremist rhetoric got him killed. and yeah I’d have to say it’s far more of his own style of it. The part that baffles me is how it’s only 60%, unless they somehow posed it as rhetoric against him. To me that question is as basic as saying “did gun violence have anything to do with his death?”, uhh yeah.

I have feeling the question is vaguely worded so that they can then try and tear it to say “is it people saying he supports facism the reason for the violence”. So that they can push to criminalize describing reality and pointing out real problems, because some people might try to solve problems with violence.

Who the hell is thinking of these concepts. News has been running on chatgpt giving dangerous hallucinations, suicide instructions, mimicking love and attachment.

In short the only way to wind up with an LLM that’s probably safe for kids, would be to start training from zero. Give it absolutely no exposure to anything that wasn’t curated from the start… say the initial data set being a catalog of mr rogers and seseme street scripts. Starting from “everything on the internet” and then trying to restrict down is a fools erend. That’s like trying to make a porn blocker with a blacklist strategy.

More importantly, The prosecution explicitly gave him a definition of sexual relations that excluded oral sex. Then nailed him to the wall for thinking it excluded oral sex.

Also in news, the 37 felony convictions might be because trump comitted some crimes. Does he think he’s brilliant and the rest of the country is idiots? You aren’t dealing with a criminal mastermind, your dealing with a batman villain. The issue isn’t that he’s so clever nobody can see his clever manuvering, it’s that everyone in a position to do something about it, is corrupt as fuck.

It’s the point though, not even completely undefended, still not 10% of the same level of defense as the primary points of capitalism. IE just note how much force, propoganda etc… is pushed at any country that isn’t capitalist enough. Right now fishing boats are being bombed. or even non military force, like the trade embargo’s on cuba etc…

and heaven knows how many government sponsered coups etc… Point is a lot of resources go into doing everything possible to make things that aren’t capitalist enough have a very steep uphill climb.

While they certainly implode… I think there’s the old problem.

Like say you have 5 co-operative communities that focus on building up great resources, polite trade with eachother, no focus on millitary.

Then you throw in 2 Viking type communities, extremely warlike, that have no independent ability to gather resources… but specifically focus on pillaging.

Obviously the vikings take out the poorly defended villages to build up resources, before going after eachother, in the long run everyone dies out because the vikings wreck everything for everyone, and leave nothing for themselves.

I feel like that’s kind of a form of what happens with capitalism vs socialism types. we’ve got elements that really just want peace… but the warlike ones will just continue to survive, as long as there are enough peaceful societies to wreck… and unfortunately the peaceful ones are the ones to go down first, in spite of being the only ones that would survive long term without the others existance.

We should give a fuck about reddit, twitter, facebook etc… as controlling mechanisms that are poisoning the overwhelming majority of the population. Keeping an eye on their impact to society kind of matters.

Yeah to me I don’t think the process really should matter that much, dude signs, has a designated signer pushes a button, what really matters is he knew what was going on and gave some form of confirmation.

To me, hypothetically president X, asks an intern to forge his signature, but says “he just authorized X”, that should be more legit than if a paper goes in front of president Y, he signs it without reading it, he’s asked about it 30 minutes later and has no clue what it is.

kind of ironic, I know so many in the poorer side of the country that argued "I know he’s an immoral horrible person, a womanizer, cheater, thief and a racist but I think his policies will be better for the economy.

apparently in rich circles there’s the opposite "I know his policies will wreck the economy, but I can’t help but think voting against him would send the message that a lying, cheating, racist rich guy who thinks he’s entitled to every woman might disqualify them for office… I can’t risk that.

Who’d have thought… the recomendations for how to lower prices… were, to stop doing those things everyone told him would raise prices and he swore up and down wouldn’t.

Flying pig was too on the nose?

That’s probably the scariest thought of immortality. Living normal life is one thing… hell most the things are just… more of the good and bad. But yeah over the course of thousands of years, the million to one scenerios that could get you trapped. (landslides, earth quakes, building collapses, swept out to sea, intentional “murder” (IE an enemy knows he can’t kill you, so he entombs, burries you etc…)

But then what leverage would horrible jobs have to prevent you from quitting if you weren’t worried of starving? and where is the money to start more wars and fund failing nations like argentina going to come from if we spend all our taxes helping the american people

I do 100% agree that the concept of having hugely varied terms for pedophile, and say the term Minor attracted person, and get really sick of hearing people lash out on when the term MAP is used to say “You just want to protect pedophiles”.

No I want people who have the urge to abuse children, to get treatement and never act on it and live peaceful happy lives where they never harm an innocent person, and to me that is far better of an outcome than a child being abused, but supposedly it gets made up for by the abuser getting tortured in prison.

I do have to second this… 4 levels of debate are valid on this.

Should executions be happening period.

if they should, did these people do crimes that should justify the use.

Are we really 100% beyond any remote feasible chance that they are guilty?

Agreed you and me are on board that taking it off at the first question is where it should be. But I also agree, the veteran status of the govorner or the people doesn’t really give me any change to the view, nor do I comprehend how it should.

It’s so fricking infuriating because, literally we were actually seeing the cracks form. Trump admin is violating the hatch act, pushing “dem’s have shut down the government”, and yet poll after poll shows the american people put the blame on the republicans. Trump was constantly boo’d to his face at the commanders game… and the democrats had an amazing election where they won every contest they were in. I can’t fathom a worse time to fold

I don’t think it even requires the police, in most US states, the law basically says that assuming the gated community has a “unauthorized vehicles will be towed at owners expense” sign somewhere, then the owners of the gated community don’t need police approval, they can call a towing company directly and have the cars removed, only needing to inform the police afterwards.

In recent days, aides have presented Trump with three scenarios for the overall outcome of the redistricting fight, none of which include Republicans losing seats when all the maps are finalized

So, sounds to me like… trumps yes men are only bringing him scenerios where he wins. They don’t want to be like the girl who brought him unfavorable jobs numbers.

As a result basically they might slice numbers up so that in attempting to dillute democratic districts out of existance, they may instead turn all the districts competitive, and if everything swings like this last election he might lose more than he gains.

Admitted though, could go in favor for him as obviously this weeks election had one huge key detail going in it’s favor, the democrats gave the illusion they were actually fighting and standing up to trump. Which as usual they managed to completely screw it up… right after getting overwhelming evidence that “yes this is what we want!”.

That’s the double whammy to me. It’s bad enough that we lost and got nothing for it, but we paid a huge price.

I mean, that’s not a bad thing to do assuming you are making the right cases. It’s more of the cases being made that’s the issue rather than where they are making them. If your case is good, you should want it to go to the people who are against you. Worse case it does nothing, best case it puts someone on the path to changing their mind.