ZC3rr0r

He’s gonna nuke Tehran isn’t he?

Who could’ve guessed that eschewing the US’s soft power they built up over decades for Russian style “might makes right” posturing and sabre rattling would not work? Trump is really speedrunning to “Chinese ultimatums” with this fiasco.

Yep, it’s just baffling how this cat that we backed further and further into the corner started acting out. Who could’ve seen that coming?

Now there’s a peace negotiation tactic everyone can get behind.

“For every complex problem there’s an easy and simple solution that is wrong”. But yes, I agree with you that there doesn’t seem to be a solution to the problem other than to introduce consequences for this kind of hateful ideology into society again.

It’s something we’re not going to solve in a Lemmy comment thread, but this “paradox of tolerance” is something governments the world over struggle with.

And you are correct in saying that bad actors will find a way to leverage any perceived weakness (tolerance, kindness, decency) against you, because they experience no moral or social repercussions for doing so. It’s the same reason something like the “Gish gallop” works, if you face no repercussions for lying exploiting the societal framework against your opponent by shifting the onus onto them to stay truthful and refute your lies mean you get to shift the burden of work to them, meaning it’s easier and faster to lie and keep lying.

And yes, you are also correct on how curtailing speech by legislation can be a slippery slope, malicious actors will likely leverage whatever you come up with to curtail hate speech and inciting of violence against their targets groups into the exact thing they will use to then attack the liberties of those groups with. I just don’t think not doing anything and letting societal repercussions do the job for us is working all to well either (see the rise of Nazi and other extremist right-wing ideologies).

While I don’t disagree in principle on the importance of freedom of expression, there are edge cases like these where it becomes hard to justify the potential societal harm associated with certain types of speech.

Take your example - if we have more Nazis publicly express their hateful beliefs we risk normalizing their ideology, meaning that calling folks out for being a Nazi starts to lose it’s effectiveness to the point of it becoming just another political belief. So all your pictures and stuff you are proposing cease to be effective, and may even act as further normalization of their hateful speech. All the while making the Nazi’s target demographics feel more insecure and ostracized in society.

As I said in my top comment, I strongly believe the tolerance of intolerance is, in itself, normalizing, promoting, and condoning intolerance. So while you are free to say what you want, once that crosses a line of inciting acts of violence or promoting discrimination, we should stop treating it as expression and consider it equivalent or at least related to committing an act of either.

If we don’t we end up with Nazi Germany before long.

I am honestly surprised it took this long for someone to warp freedom of expression right back around to include freedom of hate speech and racist symbolism. “Tolerance of intolerance is intolerance” applies here and I hope this is where the line gets drawn.

Real OJ Simpson “If I did it” vibes.

Gee, it’s almost like power vacuums tend to be detrimental to the stability of a country.

Oh, I am not saying they’re not still opportunistic money-chasers. Hence the comment about there not being any good AI companies. To me though, their reluctance on some topics and honest admissions on the capabilities of their AI make it appear that they less happy to throw all principals overboard in the race to win the AI market than the likes of Google, Microsoft, and Musk.

Still. I will happily take a company with some moral fiber over one with none when it comes to this AI race to the bottom.

Not saying Anthropic are the good guys here (there are none IMHO) but they are clearly trying to be the “less bad guys”.

As someone who was never fond of the concept of social media, and who never had a MySpace or Facebook account as a result when I was in my late teens/early twenties - this hits home for me.

I did it knowingly, but I sure missed out on a lot of stuff that I usually only found out months after.

For a while my friends nicknamed me “the untagable” 🤣, but I guess not having my entire dumb early adulthood saved for eternity is a win in the end.

Minimum 250 cc, alright. Doc didn’t specify what proof that was supposed to be…

Fair. At least the stated mission of the Chinese isn’t to be evil for evil’s sake. Palantir just seems like an accelerationist’s tool and nothing more.

Fully agree. I just don’t trust China any much more than the US to respect privacy and consumer choice. Color me prejudiced if you want, but I’ve dealt with enough Chinese suppliers to have a decent idea of how they operate.

I’ll take any silver lining, but I’m not sure if whatever replaced it will be any better given how the Chinese have acted in markets they’ve achieved majority stake in.

I am partially convinced he started the war with Venezuela specifically because he felt slighted by her winning the prize. Just so he can be petty and deny her the reason she was awarded the prize in the first place.