frumplestlatz

3 ms·

1.
by frumplestlatz 5d ago
Thanks for keeping the spirit of the old internet alive :) I hope you won’t have to restore it from tape!
2.
by frumplestlatz 5d ago
Failure to comply with burdensome regulation in the way that you would prefer does not inherently make it the problem of those you have burdened.
3.
by frumplestlatz 5d ago
The only “genocide” in history where the population actually increased. This is another “if everyone just …”. Everyone will not “just”. We can’t even agree on basic facts like your claim of genocide.
4.
by frumplestlatz 5d ago
They've demonstrated comfort with and a capacity for ignoring the law.
5.
by frumplestlatz 5d ago
“If you think any of these laws prevent felons and other prohibited persons …” The three major categories of prohibited persons are felons, domestic abusers, and habitual drug users. Guess what all three have in common?
6.
by frumplestlatz 6d ago
That counts as many states, and most of the "anti-gun" states, which is what the parent actually said. Personally, I think people should be as free as possible to sell goods privately without the government getting involved. It&#x
7.
by frumplestlatz 10d ago
We tried that. League of Nations. The UN. How has that worked out? Human order is fundamentally kept by there being a true threat of violence enforcing it. If you forget that reality and abandon your ability to project violence, someone els
8.
by frumplestlatz 10d ago
I’m as atheist as they come and I see the tenets of Islam — as widely practiced throughout the world, and self-reported in a litany of surveys — to be clearly anti-woman, anti-freedom, anti-free speech, pro blasphemy-law, et al … and as a r
9.
by frumplestlatz 11d ago
Power over others can never be post-scarcity, and it's an incredible motivator.
10.
by frumplestlatz 11d ago
In which case, any country willing to fund a military and start a war would dominate the world. Slavery and the death penalty are poor analogies, and not just because slavery was stopped through quite a bit of violence, and the death penalt
11.
by frumplestlatz 11d ago
> So, Democratic candidates who are looking like they will win a seat this midterm cycle are going to get arrested for "domestic terrorism". It would be fascinating to revisit this comment with you after the midterms and see wh
12.
by frumplestlatz 11d ago
It will be more of a problem if 100 idiotic startups are cold-calling doctors offices via their AI agents. It’s already often difficult to get a human on the phone.
13.
by frumplestlatz 11d ago
This is a form of accelerationism that I can get behind. The humane Internet died a long time ago. There’s not much worth saving.
14.
by frumplestlatz 11d ago
That sounds like a terrible use-case unless there’s already a pre-existing relationship with the provider, and it seems questionable even then.
15.
by frumplestlatz 11d ago
> This series of comments paints a picture of somebody starting from ideological priors and then trying to bend reality to arrive at their premade conclusion. The irony is palpable. > I trust actual statistics experts I listed the iss
16.
by frumplestlatz 11d ago
> Centralist and unbiased by another It’s little odd that you replied to the least substantive fact. Disingenuous even. > "brazenly disingenuous" in such context is a ridiculous and emotive over statement. “… behavior that&#
17.
by frumplestlatz 11d ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49700433 https://www.allsides.com/news-source/sky-news-media-bias You’re just being brazenly disingenuous at this point. The publication is left-leaning, regardless
18.
by frumplestlatz 12d ago
I think you’ve confused HN for BlueSky.
19.
by frumplestlatz 12d ago
Andrew Anglin, the subject of the first article, was re-banned in 2023 for the same reason that crimethink, inc was banned. The subjects of the second article are particularly odious right-wing conspiracy theorists and racists that lost the
20.
by frumplestlatz 12d ago
They were banned for literally advocating for political violence. The fact that they hadn’t been banned earlier is the only concerning fact here. The current top article on their website argues for punching their political opponents in the
21.
by frumplestlatz 12d ago
So journalists ran a study with extremely poor sampling, base rate, and classification methodology designed by left-wing researchers and activists groups (including groups explicitly opposed to X), found the conclusions they wanted to find,
22.
by frumplestlatz 12d ago
Given its extremely liberal content moderation policy, how is X a propaganda machine?
23.
by frumplestlatz 12d ago
The comment I replied to said "large companies", not government, and I don't see the equivalence.
24.
by frumplestlatz 12d ago
Why is it “so wrong” to meet your audience where they are?
25.
by frumplestlatz 13d ago
The president that has faced three distinct assassination attempts in the past two years?
26.
by frumplestlatz 13d ago
They've never actively disallowed it, and volunteers have been happy to maintain it.
27.
by frumplestlatz 14d ago
Sounds like a great reason to oppose violent rhetoric and action before it becomes normalized.
28.
by frumplestlatz 14d ago
What social good do you intend to secure by attacking data centers? How exactly do you propose going about that?
29.
by frumplestlatz 14d ago
Unfortunately? Are we really at the point of supporting terrorism of the “correct” political persuasion?
30.
by frumplestlatz 17d ago
The prompts themselves smuggle in the assumption that clan membership is a meaningful selection criteria — with a material impact on outcomes - to which the model should pay attention. It shouldn’t be surprised that the model did what it wa

More ›