jibal

39 ms·

721.
by jibal 9mo ago
Corporations and billionaires routinely lie in order to maximize their wealth. After all, why not ... they aren't bound by scruples.
722.
by jibal 9mo ago
No it isn't -- that's an ignorant myth. Madison was the last person in the world who would have endorsed overthrowing his new government ... the Constitution is quite explicit that that is treason and the penalty is death. The fir
723.
by jibal 9mo ago
The evidence goes strongly against your claims.
724.
by jibal 9mo ago
The title change from "AISLE" to "AI" is misleading. As the article states, > This doesn't mean that AI can replace human expertise. The OpenSSL maintainers' deep knowledge of the codebase was essential for
725.
by jibal 9mo ago
My shower and all my sinks have this design.
726.
by jibal 9mo ago
What assumed impact? > A crowd showing up doesn't automatically translate to minds changed or policy moved. Strawman much? > If the tactics alienate more people than they persuade, visibility alone isn't doing much. What tac
727.
by jibal 9mo ago
> Assuming critics are just reflexively resistant This is not an accurate or thoughtful characterization of what you're responding to; it's not even in the same ballpark. > is a convenient way to avoid asking whether the cri
728.
by jibal 9mo ago
The sealioning j-a pretends that "Either you're playing around by extending a joke to the point that I can't follow it, or you forgot to read the first sentence of your own article" and all of the rest of his comments ar
729.
by jibal 9mo ago
AI being harder to spot still won't make dead internet crackpottery true. As for us being cooked ... in so many ways, including literally due to AGW, exacerbated by LLM compute and by the orange demento's policies.
730.
by jibal 9mo ago
https://medium.com/@paulgannonbike/for-a-more-accurate-accou... "John Bull Jan 18, 2018 Hello Paul, Thanks very much for your response! Goes without saying that I bow to your more expert knowledge. Your book has b
731.
by jibal 9mo ago
Such posts are identifiable and rare, disproving Dead Internet Theory (for now).
732.
by jibal 9mo ago
Global warming means that the globe is warming, not that it is warm globally (in the sense of everywhere at once).
733.
by jibal 9mo ago
"Rejecting" nonexistent mythical entities is not "experimentation".
734.
by jibal 9mo ago
Not a non sequitur ... go back and read what they responded to.
735.
by jibal 9mo ago
> And there are people who I think love me. Everyone reading your comment loves you, for just yourself and for your kindness and generosity.
736.
by jibal 10mo ago
> I'm asking why. You never asked anything, rude boy. All the misunderstanding is yours. I said I wouldn't respond again to your sealioning ... I'll stick to it this time. Over and out.
737.
by jibal 10mo ago
They were (are) in the article title, so that doesn't change the point that it proves that people didn't read it.
738.
by jibal 10mo ago
We recently had a post here where the claim being refuted was in quotes in the title, but half the comments were as if the article were making the claim, clearly indicating that people didn't read it (and don't understand how quot
739.
by jibal 10mo ago
> That's what I didn't comprehend. Why did you reply there and phrase it like that. This is so dumb ... I responded to "sounds like" ... duh.
740.
by jibal 10mo ago
It's back end of the post-war boom.
741.
by jibal 10mo ago
> and what enrages me the most So go fork and fix an open source browser to your satisfaction.
742.
by jibal 10mo ago
Your problem is that you have only one comment's worth of context and can't be bothered to read up the thread. The comment was "Don't be surprised when you learn their so-called "chess bots" are actually people
743.
by jibal 10mo ago
Sounds like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_Turk (because that's the joke).
744.
by jibal 10mo ago
They aren't talking about the site, they're talking about their strength (as measured by that site) so it can be compared to the numbers in the article.
745.
by jibal 10mo ago
Check out his other comments ... wow.
746.
by jibal 10mo ago
> What else, other than science, has enabled climate change through uncontrolled exploitation of resources and nature? You're changing the subject and attacking a strawman. That's not at all what I said is not true. And you&#x2
747.
by jibal 10mo ago
Where "you guys" is apparently anyone who knows anything at all about the subject. When in Congress, Al Gore worked hard to turn the government owned and run network into something that the entire population can use. ( https:&#x2F
748.
by jibal 10mo ago
> What nonsense. What rudeness. > That’s rarely the opinion of those who hold that view. I've tracked climate science deniers for decades and that simply isn't true. > If climate change has any non-human causes, then to w
749.
by jibal 10mo ago
You asked whether there anything humans should do about it other than adapting to it, and the answer is yes. And we may be past the point of returning to some baseline (it's interesting that you took one person's opinion that we a
750.
by jibal 10mo ago
A reliable citation for any of these claims is lacking.

More ›