u/CummingInTheNile

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/gasbuddy/comments/1vkwgpx/yep/

HIGHLIGHTS

The president doesn't control the gas prices tho >He does if he attacks, checks notes, "place oil boats go through to bring us oil" >>We have our own oil. >>>Is that why the reserves are the lowest they have ever been and continue to drop? Critical thinking is a skill you can learn, I promise. >>>>I was told we need to move away from gasoline cars, you can't have it both ways. >>>>>You can literally have it both ways. The transition to electrical infrastructure doesn’t have to be such a painful thing. I appreciate the attempt at whataboutism tho.

if you google image search this and ask if its real it said no lol >You can look up gas prices online, traitor >>Okay, please look up gas prices in 2022 >>>I was paying $150 to fill my tank in 2022. It costs me about $75 to fill up today. What is your point? >>>>That comparing the lowest price one president had vs the highest price another president had is fucking stupid >>>>>YOU just told me to look up the prices so I hit you with FACTS. Now you dont want me to compare them? Whats stupid is asking someone to compare something then when they do you say the point is STUPID 🤣 >>>>>>It makes sense to compare the highs versus the highs, not ones low to the other high How did that go over your head?

actual Epstein victims like Virginia Guiffre who was the public spokeswoman for the victims that chose to stay anonymous said Trump was never involved, but you fools believe your lying delusions. >Trump r*pes women and brags about sexually assaulting them. He also brags about walking into dressing rooms full of naked children and "inspecting" them. >>He ran Miss Universe for 10 years and your only evidence is shockjock Howard Stern show? >>>The evidence is trumps words, not sterns. Are you saying Trump isn’t credible? Was he lying? You sure do jump through a lot of hoops to justify supporting an admitted sexual predator. You should seek psychological help. >>>>Just so you don’t embarrass yourself in the future, you’re spreading misinformation. Trump did mention walking into dressing rooms but of the Miss Universe contest, not Miss Teen USA. Hope that helps! https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/300093-trump-confirms-he-walked-backstage-when-beauty-queens/mlite/amp/ >>>>>He never said which pagents he was talking about. He said he had the right to inspect the pagent because he owned it. He owned Miss Teen USA. Former contestants, who were as young as 15, confirmed that he did this. Why does MAGA go to bat so hard for child predators? https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/kendalltaggart/teen-beauty-queens-say-trump-walked-in-on-them-changing >>>>>>He literally did though. Stern was talking specifically about Miss Universe. I’m just trying to help you not spread misinformation. The article you linked is not the conversation in question and has also been denied by several other contestants. Look, the guy is a dirt bag 100% but your info is inaccurate. If you don’t care and just want to spread misinformation more power to you!

So he is no different than you. Got it. >Really? That's like fifth grade lame shit. >>5th grade lame shit is believing rumors and not evidence. Edit: not a single comment i received by a user that then blocked me so I couldnt reply had a shred of evidence lol >>>His own words admit to being a sexual predator. Do you support sexual predators? >>>>that's just something your cult repeats. And why is it said so often now and not his first term? Epstein was a democrat btw

We're literally in a war with Iran dude. >You are so close to getting it. >>That is it. Trouble in middle east, gas prices go up. Been that way before you were here, your whole life so far, will be that way after you die. >>>How come there wasn’t trouble back in January? >>>>The specific timing of the February 28, 2026 strikes was driven by intelligence warnings that Iran was moving its advanced nuclear infrastructure deeper underground, combined with high-level diplomatic lobbying by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This converged with a calculated tactical pivot by the incoming Trump administration to replace faltering negotiations with an immediate, decisive "decapitation strike." >>>>>Weird. I was told by the administration in the summer of 2025 that Iran’s nuclear capability had been “COMPLETELY OBLITERATED” >>>>>>

According to Google Bidens national average high price was $5.02 per gallon in June 2022 and Trump's was $4.50 in spring 2026. >But…facts. Oh no!!! >>The post is showing the price when Biden left 🤦‍♀️ Why did it go up? Can you figure that one out? >>>Well when you have a completely open boarder when you leave office everything tends to shoot up when trying to clean up mistakes >>>>Except it wasn’t. And that wouldn’t make gas go up. Thinking hard wahhhhhh >>>>>TDS confirmed lmao facts do make libs cry, see this comment for proof. >>>>>>Well I’m sorry you’re crying, but thanks for the proof I guess?

I really do find these posts to be so disingenuous. Either that or people simply do not understand the bigger picture. Biden’s gas prices sucked for no material reason, I’ll take the current prices if it limits Iran’s capacity to create a nuclear weapon. >They never had a nuke. They never tried to make a nuke. They allowed foreign inspections teams to their nuclear facilities, Israel doesnt. Grow a spine. >>I quite clearly never said they had a nuke. They allowed foreign inspectors to see what they wanted to present whilst secretly enriching uranium behind other doors. Don’t insult me simply because you dislike Israel and are naive to Iran’s actual (and very blatant) intent. >>>I’m sure the schools were building nukes or smth right? >>>>I don’t think you understand how military operations work, but things go wrong almost all the time and militaries operate with limited situational awareness; the Yanks and Israelis made a mistake, what do you want me to say? Trying to be funny does not change the fact that Iran has been attempting to enrich enough uranium to make a bomb. This is well documented, you just need to venture beyond Reddit… >>>>>How much do you need for a bomb? They would have had one already if they really wanted to make one. Like use some brain cells, you gotta have a few. But I’m sure ripping up the agreement we had and bombing the fuck out of them will definitely make them not want a nuke so we cant do that again :) >>>>>>They were blatantly ignoring the agreement in place from Obama whilst being funded by the American tax payer; brain cells are indeed worth using. Perhaps if you also used them you would know that enriching uranium is not a simple process and requires 90% enrichment of a rare resource. Google is free, Iran has been enriching Uranium for decades to no avail and made substantial progress in the last few years since Oct 7.

Gas will inevitably go back down like it always does and then go back up like it always fuckin does, then go back down like it always does etc etc. >No! You have to orange man bad! We’ve NEVER had high gas prices before! This is the first time you MAGAT >>Except these high prices are directly tied to this stupid pointless war that is getting us nowhere except a critical strait of water shut down that also happens to be where 20% of the worlds oil flows through. >>>Soooo orange man 1/2 bad? >>>>I know you’re just trying to troll on this. This and the TDS reply are common ways you guys deflect and don’t address the actual issue. It’s the go to response to ignores the actual facts. >>>>>Well what if I didn’t come here for an actual debate and just wanted to fuck around?????? This is a multipurpose app after all. >>>>>>I guess when the president has been this bad, trolling/fucking around really is the only thing you can do. Bravo!!!

Waiting for the MAGA sore ass losers 😭😭😭😭😭 but but but but we haven't hit that peak that we totally blame on Biden even though it was the breakout of the war in Ukraine 😭😭😭😭😭😭 >In 2022, regular gasoline in Wisconsin reached an all-time record state average high of $4.92 per gallon on June 12, 2022, driven by spikes in global crude oil prices. Prices in several southeastern counties, including Milwaukee County, pushed past $5.14 per gallon during that summer peak. I'm not a trump supporter. simple Google search >>2022 was caused by an unexpected war the US did not initiate, compared to now - a completely optional one initiated by the current president. >>>Hey remember when everybody said it wasn't the president that made gas prices? Cause I sure do >>>>Hey remember when everybody said it wasn't the president that made gas prices? Cause I sure do >>>>>They mean normally. It does if you single handedly start a war that jeopardizes 20% of global oil supply. >>>>>>Sure I understand but Obama still has the record for the highest gas prices. He bombed 7 different countries. Almost 27,000 bombs across those regions. He also killed four Americans during those bombings.

Donnie shitting the bed on the weekly >Yeah, I bet all this posting pays off and he doesn’t get re elected. >>Let me get you a wahhhh burger with them French cries >>>Tell me again, which side is here whining about President Trump? I just can’t seem to remember. Hang on. It will come to me. 🤭 >>>>Who wouldn’t complain about a literal admitted sexual predator being president? If standing up against a sexual predator is whining, then I’m for whining. The question is why do you support an admitted sexual predator? What psychological deficiency do you think you have that allows for this? >>>>>Oh, is that what y’all are doing in here by showing pictures of gas prices? It’s really hard to tell. You should work on your message. >>>>>>Good defense for supporting an admitted sexual predator

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/RimWorld/comments/1vpxw0i/official_rimworld_discord_server_bans_all_ai/

HIGHLIGHTS

Stupid, atleast for the code part. 90% of devs use it anyway. >Lol the fucking cope. Any moron claiming 90% percent of people totally do the same thing as them is desparately trying to defend something they know is wrong. >>"Everyone I know smokes meth," screams meth head in Wal-Mart parking lot. >>>Comparing tools used for a job to drugs is a wild and stupid statement. >>>>As someone who’s forced to use AI for work, comparing AI to useful tools is a wild and stupid statement. >>>>>Not sure what your job is, but for me as software engineer its great. >>>>>>Software engineer forced to use Claude Fable. With the amount of bugs and utter trash that piece of junk produces, if you actually use it for your work... let's just say I wouldn't trust anything you put out lmao.

and let the witch hunt begin as there is no objective way to prove if it was used or not so the baseless accusations fly around and the community implodes. Just like every other witch hunt in the history of man...Have fun with the feeding frenzy I guess. >Comparing being banned from a video game discord with being repeatedly r*ped and burned at the stake for having skin tags or a mole? Go off, king. Say your truth. /s >>Today, the term also means an unfair attack or investigation against political rivals or people with different views. >>>I'm reffering specifically to them saying "just like every witch hunt in history" Like dude, everyone knows what it means in modern context, and everyone knows where the expression came from, so saying that knowing these two things is wack as fuck. >>>>Then why did you go on some sort of anachronistic rant about it? >>>>>The original commenter is the one who made the "in the history of man" comment, idk dude, figure it out. Wasn't a rant, it was an observation

Stupid AF and y'all are happy for less content when I bet none of you even mod lol >Im very happy that we get less slop >>lEsS sLoP >>>yep, less slop. Good

Bro the AI hysteria is gonna set us back years. Modern-day luddites. >Make models that don't rely on stolen content, don't use it to flood the market, and don't force people to use it. Maybe then sentiments will change. If AI was a home heating tech you would be blasting us as opposing the use of fire. When the reality is some prefer gas, some prefer electric, but none want a billionaire coming in and taking our current systems so you can replace them with The Orphan Incinerator 5000. >>"stolen" I love how reddit becomes super defensive of intellectual property rights on this one very specific topic >>>"Stupid peasants are super defensive of Robin Hood's thievery but don't support the Sheriff of Nottingham's aggressive tax collecting. Both are taking coins from the current owners!" >>>>If the AI companies were demanding that you give them your money without your consent, like a thief or a tax collector, you would have a really great point here >>>>>"If the AI companies were demanding that you give them your money without your consent, like a thief or a tax collector, you would have a really great point here" I am quoting this so when you go back and try to delete it after realizing what you just said it stays, mr doc89. Wow. Did you even realize the conversation was about LLMs? The things scraping every bit of art, music, writing, and personal data out there, without a care for consent, compensation, or legality, so the owners of the LLMs can make money selling tokens and advertising using the stolen data? >>>>>>I have no intention to delete it you rube. Yes they are "scraping" art, music and writing without consent. Sort of like how I can go on youtube and listen to Beethoven and Tchaikovsky right now even though those guys did not consent. You guys sound like the weird boomers who thought that Napster and the internet were going to be the end of the recording industry in the late 90s.

It's not hysteria, AI is trained via unethical and illegal ways using material that is frequently stolen and/or pirated and that AI companies don't have permission to use, it's harmful to the environment, and AI data centers have been proven to be destructive towards local communities. >Even if you ran an AI agent for 250 hours, it would be ten gallons of water. One pound of beef is around 5000 gallons. AI isn't even 0.05% of worldwide water useage. A single AI search is around 10 google searches worth of water. >>And the power, pollution, and blatant theft? >>>beef is literally 1000x worse except for theft >>>>Well I guess the question is, are you a Vegan or a hypocrite?

This is good, hopefully it lead to reduction of scams, DRAM prices will go down and there will be less slop overall >how in the world, would a modding community discord banning AI content, cause the price of DRAM to go down....? >>He was joking I think >>>Doesn't look like it... >>>>People don't use /s outside of reddit Edit: i was wrong. >>>>>https://www.reddit.com/r/RimWorld/comments/1vpxw0i/comment/p415jw9/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button Yeah, this isnt a "sarcastic" followup. This is a double down. >>>>>>Shit dude, you're right, my bad.

I have adopted a no-Discord content all my life, and I feel very well for it. How anyone thinks censorship of any kind is to be applauded, is mindboggling >I love AI bros attempts to market this as censorship "I stole this guy's painting and wasn't allowed to display it as my own! This is censorship!!!!" >>Uh, yeah, that's been the internet since its inception. Who made the thinking raptor image for the meme? Who made the lol wut image for the meme? Who is paying those people royalties? The internet has been a theft-den in the name of entertainment for decades, but when some 2020s computer programs do it, now it's somehow a step too far? >>>Who made the paint for the mona lisa? Who formed the sedimentary rock Grug uses for his cave paintings? You're just trying to stretch the definition to find an excuse to not develop an actual skill. >>>>"Who made the paint for the mona lisa" Someone who got paid. "Who formed the sedimentary rock Grug uses for his cave paintings?" Physics. As opposite to, a person made the thinking raptor image, and was never paid for it for being used on the internet as a meme. As opposite to, a person made the lol wut image, and was never paid for it for being used on the internet as a meme. Your examples are not the same. >>>>>So your response to a perceived injustice is to continue being unjust because nobody punished you? >>>>>>My reaction is to recognize the status quo and move on. The people who are crying about losing their jobs or being stolen from, did nothing for decades while others' work was being stolen from. Why do their grievances matter, if they have never, nor plan to address, similar grievances except the ones that directly affect them in [current year]?

I agree with Art, there is a human element to good art, but to code? Using AI as a coding tool is incredibly common and that seems really restrictive >Vibecoding often leads to horrible code. If its done and reviewed by a programmer, that uses it to write boilerplate and corrects it, I don’t see much issue, else you just have hundreds of lines of nonsense code that just waste performance, risk bugs and may even open security risks. >>I'm sorry and the plethora of popular shittily made mods is non-existent? Some of the most used mods of all time are put on "Do Not Use" lists because of their poor code >>>Human error > AI error One doesn't negate the other, there's issues with both, but I prefer some incompetent clown fucking up than having said clown vibe-code shit that'll end up giving my game a memory leak or some shit. Disclaimer, idk shit about code so take what I'm saying with a grain of salt >>>>"Human error > AI error" This is just bs. My game doesn't care about who made the mistake, the game is breaking/crashing either way. I prefer what actually works instead of emotional people getting rid of content just because. The whole premise of it is dumb asf, it's 100%freef and OPTIONAL fan content. If you truly don't like it then just uninstall it. The whole reason this made sense with art was because art is a expression of the soul, which is non existent in AI, but with modding? Who cares?

I'm guessing it's so that they can ban people who try to promote their AI generated mods or something, otherwise they would've just banned all conversation about it >How are they planning to verify which mods had coding done by a.i.? >>Some of them are really fucking obvious either in appearance, in the files, or the way they break things. >>>If you are genuinely a good modder who use AI well, then who the fuck cares. The real issue is that more than half the AI users out there have no idea what the fuck they are doing. This rule is about quality control, not AI fear. >>>>Then they should say it so, instead of just banning all AI mods. Seriously, they'll have to ban harmony of all mods with those standards. >>>>>They are probably leaving some room for the genuinely good ones. Many AI modders think they are hot shit but most of them are just shit. It’s a pretty normal thing to do to make exceptions for certain people even if the rules say XYZ, and I’m not talking about just this Discord. It’s a pretty common practice in business to discourage masses from trying to exercise their main character syndrome. >>>>>>I really don't think its a good idea, leaving holes and exceptions in rules like that. Why not just make rules like 'we ban AI mods made by modders who haven't even looked at their code' then 'we ban all AI mods, no written exceptions except for few'.

"Any modder that uses AI in their mods (art or code) will have their content and roles removed from the Discord." Guess my mods, which accumulate a total of humble yet considerable amount of 17876 subscribers, are not welcomed in the community anymore because I dared use AI assistance like half of the workshop mods. Good luck with the witchhunts. They are going to be pretty ugly. Let me help you start by saying that mods like Regrowth (290305 subscribers) Medieval Gene Assembler (14924 subscribers) Rimpsyche personality core (27870 subscribers) Rimpsyche disposition (16348 subscribers) RimIOT (18764 subcsribers) FPS And TPS (45299 subscribers) are not welcomed anymore and their authors are no longer modders, since they used AI assistance. Edit to add: HARMONY itself is made with AI assitance. It's author even make tools to help code with AI (MCP tools) Harmony is the backbone of the whole modding community, and suddenly it's not welcomed anymore in the discord community. Just wow. >It is ok, people here simply do not know nothing about software developemnt and are just virtue signaling. >>Weird how software development was impossible before AI considering AI software had to be developed. It's a real chicken or egg situation, nobody can explain it. I guess we'll never know if a world exists where a human can write code. >>>You are just making stuff up, nobody says that making code without AI is impossible but it is much easier to use it. There is reason that 90% of actual devs use it. >>>>Source? >>>>>Stack overflow survey for year 2025 >>>>>>Mate idk if you're sure about referencing that one because it actually shows a decrease in AI favorability and an increase in distrusting AI output? lmao >>>>>>>https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2025/ it shows 76% increase compared to 2024. What are you talking about

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/antiai/comments/1vmul7z/absolutely_despicable_to_be_judging_a_eighth/

HIGHLIGHTS

That kid got brainwashed and you cheer because its something you subscribe to. lol >How are they brainwashed? >>a 13yr old with political pins covering their backpack as their identity. thats brainwashed. >>>Wo having political beliefs make you brain washed? And only 2 are political and that’s if you think being anti ai is political >>>>It is literally all political. >>>>>What’s political about owl house, Minecraft, misc animated characters, or being LGBTQ+ >>>>>>use your brain. you got this. >>>>>>>Ok. Sure. They arent

Huh? This kid is just living their life and not harming anyone. Why not support them if it makes them happy? >Because brainwashing is brainwashing. a kid in 8th grade shouldn't even be thinking about bulkshit like this. >>Cool bro have a sad life >>>Lmfao. I disagree with you so my life is sad? hahahahhaha. Based on you posting this and thinking about this stuff regularily, it actually sounds like youre the one living a sad life. 7 signs your schizophrenia medication may not be working >>>>I agree with you other than the AI crap if my daughter came to me on some abolish ice shit I’d telll her take yo ass back to the kids table the adults are talking lmao >>>>>Kids should be being kids. They shouldn't be thinking about the shortcomings of the political world. >>>>>>I'm sure this kid is living their life just fine man >>>>>>>Yeah it really looks like it based on their entire identity being political tags covering their entire backpack at the age of 13. >>>>>>>>the only tag that's remotely political is the abolish ICE one, and maybe the ai one, and they're also just backpack decorations, who cares

How are they brainwashed?? Just because someone doesn’t agree with you politically doesn’t mean they are brainwashed, you can have political opinions as a teenager without it being the product of brainwashing. Maybe you can say they lack worldly experience because they are young and thus their opinions may change (which isn’t necessarily true) but brainwashing is a tall statement. >They're in 8th grade. They're brainwashed. Sorry you cant recognize that. >>No points offered, lmao typical. >>>the point: the kid is brainwashed. it worries me that you couldn't figure that out on your own. >>>>That isn't a point, that is a statement. Looks like you failed to educate yourself and the school system failed you. >>>>>points are statements. that was embarrassing of you lmfao. >>>>>>A point is backed up with facts and typically works cited. A statement lacks both. "The sky is blue, here is blah blah blah source" vs "the sky has a submarines floating in it." One is based on facts & can be proven correct or at least researced, the other is a statement that has no point to it.

what republicans fear the most. people having empathy and love >I’m right leaning and I believe in love and I’m anti AI >>Just one question why? Why are you right leaning? You do know what the right does right? >>>Don't lump all right-leaning into the far-right category. You don't like it when others stereotype, so don't do it either. >>>>You do realize the Overton window has shifted so far to the right "right leaning" means far right regardless right? You can't support any right wing candidate and not be considered an extremist because they are ALL openly bigoted and oppressive. Trump especially >>>>>And who said anyone supports any candidates? I stopped supporting any politicians because they're ALL corrupt liars who are paid to play. I stopped voting 2 years ago because of it. >>>>>>So you are even worse than a right winger. You are a fence sitter who doesn't want to fight for what's right

And education. The fact that this kid is in school and not church is another thing they fear. >You realize many democrats and socialists are religious? But keep up with your Low iq takes per usual >>Not the point >>>Surreee >>>>son, this is bait >>>>>Then why are you triggered >>>>>>You do understand what the others are saying, correct? >>>>>>>Last word doesn't mean a win. Coping? I asked a question is all.

Not necessarily. Sounds like they align with certain views. That doesn’t make them a good or bad person. This polarization is why we are where we are Edit: and here come the downvotes. The left just doesn’t learn. This is what cost you guys the election in 2024. Moderates have never aligned with the “you disagree with me? You’re an evil human!” rhetoric. But hey, have it your way >Why do you support pdophiles? >>You’re proving my point. Like to a tee. >>>Cope harder pdo defender >>>>No but like think about how your replies look to someone who’s actually not sure what side they want to align with. This is what I’m talking about >>>>>If you aren't sure then you flat out aren't a good person. The right has been blatantly open about wanting to KILL PEOPLE if you support them in any way shape or form you are a bad person >>>>>>Citation needed. Nobody ever said they would kill anyone. Y'all are so delusional and dramatic. >>>>>>>They cheer on when ICE murders people that's pretty fucking obvious they want us dead >>>>>>>>There are bad people on both sides of the aisle. Cheering, though? You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you to prove your claim. Nobody cheered for the death of another human being.

99% their parents had a massive role in this >And good job from them, managed to raise aware and accepting youngster, they can be proud of their kid. >>Yeah I'm sure the kid totally understands what all these badges mean and isn't just doing it because of their parents influence.. >>>I started to understand LGBTQ at the age of 15. There is infact a lot trans teens out there. >>>>You’ll find that the vast majority of trans kids have parents/close friends that share/push these views Make of that what you will >>>>>[removed] >>>>>>Research shows the social environment matters a lot Look into it >>>>>>>And a whole ton of other studies show that sexuality and transgenderism aren’t choices anyone can make as a concious decision, look into it before making your bigoted claims. Edit: 3 hours of unproductive messages later that dude ran to the hills after I asked 7 times for proof in a peer reviewed study that'd show that any of their claims is even remotely true. They had n-o-t-h-i-n-g. sigh biggot being biggot online again.... (47 more comments of these two arguing)

The amount of people defending political brainwashing here really makes me hate humanity even more. >What political brainwashing? AI isn’t political, being queer isn’t political. >>Don't ask questions and assume misinterpretations. I don't reply to bad faith replies. >>>What else is there though that is the only pins on the damn bag? >>>>Are you blind? Okay so LGBT propo pins? You know, an adult topic? An 8th grader should not be concerned for this??! An 8th grader doesn't even know what ICE is or why it's a thing. I don't even know what the other pins are but they are probably political in some way based on what I can identify. Ergo, the kid is brainwashed. If you want to disagree, please present an example where an 8th grader has fluently presented a philosophical or political argument which is convincing and actionable with current political systems in society. I won't wait because I already know I won't get an answer. This is fucked and you all know it. I could care less if an 8th grader had pins that agreed with my philosophies, because I would know that they would have been forced/brainwashed to do so. They simply do not have the neurological development at this age. It's gross and if ideological p*dophelia was a thing, this would be child grooming. >>>>>A persons sexuality isn’t just an adult topic, young people can be queer themselves, did you somehow not think of that? I’m not going to bother with the ice thing, I’m not even from the US. >>>>>>So kids should have sex/ explore sex? Dude, you are entering grooming territory here. Be careful. Kids will identify with things because they have undeveloped self image, so the easiest thing is to be in the "in group" which sets them up to be brainwashed easily. Ive experienced and been a part of this too as a kid, I know the damage it can cause and I'm frankly disgusted by it. The kid should have dinosaur badges or Minecraft badges or some other thing actually appropriate for kids. >>>>>>>It’s called being in a relationship, teenagers do that, they have crushes and boyfriends/ girlfriends, it’s not always about sex. (27 more comments of these two arguing)

I do not believe that, without outsider intervention by adults who do not have the child's best interest at heart, this child would even give a fuck to put half of these buttons on their backpack. >Did you ever think the kid is possibly queer, or perhaps they are an artist? These things don’t just start when you turn 18 >>It's a kid, wtf man >>>Are you dumb, kids can be gay, trans, lesbian any of these things >>>>How can a KID be trans? Is this peak reddit?? Kids dont know about that stuff >>>>>It's a 13-14 year old. Most normal people know what transgender means either before or at that age. >>>>>>Don't know about the young ones but I learnt at 25 through reddit

As much as I dislike AI, we must admit that an eighth grader should not be this heavily concerned about politics. It screams of brainwashing unfortunately. Give them time to enjoy their youth. >Nah this is Reddit. Gotta make as many people get obsessed with politics as possible. >>Not caring about politics is a privilege >>>Yes, but children should have that privilege. >>>>Not all children no Do you think the trans children this admin is attacking have that priviledge? >>>>>No, I don't think they do. I'm not claiming they do. I'm saying it would be ideal if they did, though. The goal should be for the world to be pleasant enough that children don't feel the need to be this politically charged.

If the backpack had pro life, and conservative, maga pins you would all be calling the kid a brainwahed nazi so dont even start reddit 🙄 >Because those are hateful and oppressive ideologies. You just want to bitch and moan because you don't get to be openly hateful. >>Pro life is hateful? >>>Yea. It very much is. Dating all the way back to when Republicans cooked up the political strategy in a board room after realizing that overt racism and defending Segregation wasn't winning them votes. And to show how little the much higher percentage Christian population than today of America cared about abortion, this sinister meeting took place 3 years after Roe v Wade happened. Just another manufactured political crisis. Hence why the pro-life movement only cares about the fetus before birth. After birth then fuck it. No social support whatsoever. >>>>Imagine unironically believing that opposition to killing babies only started with "Republicans" in "boardrooms" lmao >>>>>Given the almost comical contrast in how evangelicals treat the “unborn” versus actual alive children with needs, what other explanation is there? >>>>>>"oh you dont want babies to be killed but you're not gonna personally pay for and raise every poor child on the planet therefore youre a hypocrite" >>>>>>>American conservatives are actively making it more difficult to grow up for the children they are forcing to be born

If the backpack had pro life, and conservative, maga pins you would all be calling the kid a brainwahed nazi so dont even start reddit 🙄 >Because those are hateful and oppressive ideologies. You just want to bitch and moan because you don't get to be openly hateful. >>Pro life is hateful? >>>Yea. It very much is. Dating all the way back to when Republicans cooked up the political strategy in a board room after realizing that overt racism and defending Segregation wasn't winning them votes. And to show how little the much higher percentage Christian population than today of America cared about abortion, this sinister meeting took place 3 years after Roe v Wade happened. Just another manufactured political crisis. Hence why the pro-life movement only cares about the fetus before birth. After birth then fuck it. No social support whatsoever. >>>>Imagine unironically believing that opposition to killing babies only started with "Republicans" in "boardrooms" lmao >>>>>Given the almost comical contrast in how evangelicals treat the “unborn” versus actual alive children with needs, what other explanation is there? >>>>>>"oh you dont want babies to be killed but you're not gonna personally pay for and raise every poor child on the planet therefore youre a hypocrite" >>>>>>>American conservatives are actively making it more difficult to grow up for the children they are forcing to be born

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Letterboxd/comments/1vm254v/can_we_retire_objectively_better_please/

HIGHLIGHTS

I understand that what you're saying is factual based on the definition of the words, but I still don't completely agree. My favorite movie all time is still probably Pulp Fiction based purely on personal reason and much I'm entertained by it. I also love the Godfather, but it is not my favorite movie. I subjectively like Pulp Fiction better, but if I'm truly being objective, The Godfather is a better movie. We can have conversations like this. It's ok. >What do you mean by "truly objective"? I'm sure you can define some standards by which The Godfather is objectively better than Pulp Fiction. But it's entirely subjective whether those standards are what defines a good movie. >>His statement wasn't that it's good, but it's objectively better, like you said "by which The Godfather is objectively better than Pulp Fiction". But even if we were talking about being good. We could also define the average level of those objective metrics and say that if something is above that then it's objectively good. >>>Better just means more good. At least the way I'm using it. So, if you prefer: It's entirely subjective what standards you use to decide if one movie is better than another. >>>>What if it's better based on every objective standard? Like if you have 2 movies, one has better writing, the other one has better acting, I wouldn't say that one is better or worse, because assigning values to these standards is subjective. But it's different when a movie is better in every possible way, then no matter how you would have assigned values, the "better" one is always better. >>>>>You're ignoring the fact that subversion of expectation/convention can be used as an effective artistic tool. Very rigid thinking. >>>>>>This just does not go against anything that I said. Do you actually have a counter argument or you just simply failed to comprehend my point?

You could apply that same thought process to two vacuum cleaners. One picks up every last spec of dirt and the other picks up very little and spreads the mess around. I would say that the first one is an objectively better vacuum because it is nearly universally agreed upon that suction is an important characteristic of a good vacuum. So if one movie has all the components that are almost universally agreed upon make up a good film and another is missing those components entirely, you can safely say that one is objectively better. >(OP) What is the function of a film as it equates to a vacuum? One is a tool and the other is a commercial piece of art. >>I prefer food analogy. You can like junkfood, it's your subjective taste, but if we are talking about the healthiness of the food, which is objective, then we can say that junkfood is objectively not healthy. Many people understands the concept of movie quality even in their daily language. For example, many people uses the term "guilty pleasure". It refers to movies, series that are bad - or they consider them objectively bad -, but they still enjoy them. >>>And what about the healthiness of food is objective? I suppose you mean that chocolate is objectively unhealthy, yet if you’re stranded on top of a mountain with nothing to eat and at risk of starvation then that chocolate bar becomes incredibly healthy. Sugar is unhealthy because it’s bad for our teeth, and yet athletes consume a lot of it. Is milk objectively healthy? What about for someone with too much calcium? >>>>Lol what? No. Chocolate does not become magically healthy if you are starving and you can only eat chocolate. If you are starving and you can only eat cyanide, then does it also become healthy? Magically it won't poison you and you won't die? The healthiness of the food depends on what it contains and what effect those have on you. It would not change if you are starving or you are full. The chocolate has the same amount of sugar in both cases.

erm actually a movie can be objectively better and you guys using all art is subjective are wrong because there are objective metrics in quality of a movie 🤓 ☝️ >If that's the case, please enlighten us with a list of these objective metrics. >>Plot holes. Errors. Inaccurate information. Dialogue. You lack the critical thinking skills required to recognize that there are objective metrics in media. Lmao. >>>You are just throwing around vague buzzwords. What concrete objective metrics are you using to evaluate if one dialogue is better than another? What concrete objective metrics are you using to compare actors' performances? And even if a few aspects can be compared objectively (like plot holes or errors), how does that help to compare entire movies if other aspects can't? Maybe put a bit more effort in your own posts before talking down on others. >>>>it’s literally basic linguistics, not rocket science u absolute clown. dialogue efficiency is objective because u can literally measure the ratio of actual info to word count—good dialogue does three things at once while garbage scripts take ten lines of clunky exposition to say one thing. differentiation is objective because if i can strip the names off the pages and still tell who’s talking based on syntax variance, it’s high-quality structure. when every character sounds exactly like the same writer, the script is objectively broken, whether your smooth brain likes the vibe or not. You lack the critical thinking skills required to have an actual discussion. >>>>>And how do you value dialogue efficiency vs. differentiation? Let's say one movie has dialogues with way better efficiency and the other those with way better differentiation. Which movie objectively has the better dialogue? No-one is arguing that there are not certain aspects that can be compared objectively. But the whole picture is never objective, because even weighing the different factors is subjective. >>>>>>🤦‍♂️ do you have any reading comprehension skills or are you just typing shit?

I kind of agree but also not. I think everyone's opinions are valid. But it feels objectively wrong to say Dragon Ball Evolution is better than Schindlers List or something like that >Better is a term stating quality. Quality by it's nature is a quality of perspective, meaning it doesn't exist as a objective truth but as a subjective truth. >>Nah that's a play on words, nothing practical or useful. Empty philosophy. You can abailutely say something ia of better quality than something else, and that being the truth. >>>Well it’s an objective fact you’re wrong. >>>>Lmao ok buddy >>>>>You’re on the internet. I’m assuming you’re capable of searching for the difference between objective and subjective. If you’re not capable of that, or you don’t think to check your statements before you make them, maybe you shouldn’t be on here. >>>>>>Lmaooo ok little buddy. The world is not as simple as your tiny little brain thinks. You will understand eventually I'd guess

Comments are already straw manning the shit out of your point. It “feels” objectively wrong to say something like The Room is better than The Odyssey but no matter how you slice it, there is no quantifiable and objective proof that says otherwise. None. Because determining what’s a good and bad movie is solely in the hands of each individual person and how that movie made them feel. You can vehemently disagree with their takeaways of why they feel how they do, but under no circumstance can they be proven incorrect. Any attempt to do so is purely opinion vs. opinion and thus renders the concept of “objectivity” in the conversation completely irrelevant. >Yen but the Room doesn't have a coherent plot which is a quantifiable object proof that it is worse than other movies. Except if plot coherency doesn't count. I could write an essay on why the Room sucks because I'm obsessed with it and will watch it any time I get a chance, but it's a bad movie. I'm starting to wonder whether you people are mixing up taste and quality? >>Why is plot coherency objectively good? Also I don't really agree that the plot of the room isn't coherent. I personally find it uncompelling and most of the character motivations under baked, but it's coherent. If you want an example of an incoherent movie watch Andy Warhol's Vinyl (1965). >>>Because of the definitions of the words we are using. The definition of move in most dictionaries uses the word story and the definition of story refers to a connected or coherent series of events. So yes, technically if you have 2 movies or even just 2 scripts and the only difference is that one has a plot hole while the other one doesn't have, then you should be able to say that the latter is objective better. >>>>What's a plot hole though? Is it a plot hole in Eraserhead that we don't know who the radiator lady is or is it a statistic choice? Dictionary definitions are the beginning of understanding not the end. >>>>>A plot hole is an explicit contradiction, so not knowing something is generally NEVER a plot hole. For example, if a movie explicitly states that the sky is always yellow and it's impossible to have different color in that universe, then if there's a scene where it's blue - without proper explanation -, then that's a plot hole. A plot hole is well-defined and you can always clearly point to the 2 information pieces that contradict each other. >>>>>>Maybe it's symbolizing that whoever said "the sky is yellow" is dishonest or ignorant and trusting the audience to reach that conclusion without having to be told explicitly. >>>>>>>Oh god... you don't need to be told explicitly, but in that case, it needs to provide hints and those hints are EXPLICITLY in the movie. If it was mentioned that that character lies a lot of something, then we could use that as a proof. The contradicting statements are explicitly in the movie when we are talking about plot holes. When something is not stated or explained, then we are talking about plot contrivance or plot convenience.

Disagree. But also think anyone throwing around the "objectively better" phrase in people's faces is probably misguided anyway. >They're just somebody OP is imagining. There is no such person. >>Thread is full of these people >>>Screenshot? >>>>Literally read the thread for 2 minutes >>>>>Its a thread about this topic so people are gonna be talking about it. I dont see any insane zealotry on display though. Screenshot? >>>>>>screenshot Open your eyes. >>>>>>>Do you feel like they're throwing it in your face or are they just expressing their position? It seems reasonable to me but I guess that's ultimately... subjective.

there's a threshold for this argument >There is no threshold. Widely agreed upon still doesn't become objective. >>I wanna see the objective argument for Jack and Jill being a better film than Godfather >>>There is no objective argument, that's the whole point. It's all subjective. The only objective aspects are physical. >>>>It’s not all subjective. The Sistine Chapel is objectively better than a random pencil mark. >>>>>Better at what? What if the objective is being a pencil mark? >>>>>>Better as art. The Sistine Chapel is an overall better artistic achievement than a random pencil mark because it took more artistic qualities and skills to achieve. So, its greater expression of what art is capable of and therefore more artistically valuable. >>>>>>>Man I appreciate what you’re trying to say and I’m sure you’re arguing in good faith, but you can’t explain your way past the definitions of words. Subjective and objective aren’t negotiable, they’re already decided. The Sistine chapel just cannot be objectively better because that isn’t what objective means.

I think certain elements of a film can be distilled to something close to objective. For example, if I say the acting in No Country For Old Men is better than that of The Room, I feel pretty solid making that statement. >He says as he shares a subjective opinion >>It's not subjective. The acting in The Room is objectively worse because it does not fulfil the intention of the creator. >>>That's subjective... >>>>That isn't subjective at all. Tommy Wisseau did not create the film that he intended to do. I know it feels safer to just think everything is opinion, but reality does exist. >>>>>"Tommy Wisseau did not create the film that he intended to do." Nobody has created the film that they intended to do. >>>>>>Deep. Laughably incorrect. But deep. >>>>>>>Name a film that was frame by frame exactly in the directors mind before filming.

You know deliberately misinterpreting someone's point doesn't make you look intelligent, right? >He’s not misinterpreting anything. You are pathetic >>Shall we maybe keep things civil? >>>Says the guy who made the very civil comment that is: “You know deliberately misinterpreting someone's point doesn't make you look intelligent, right?” You get what you give buddy boy >>>>That was a legitimate point. Deliberately misinterpreting someone's perspective is not a good look. Calling someone pathetic without adding anything to the original conversation isn't civil and isn't helpful. >>>>>They didn’t misinterpret anything. You’re just claiming they are >>>>>>Ah, so you still don't understand fact and opinion. They objectively are misinterpreting what I've said - purposefully or accidentally, it doesn't matter. Because I know what I meant, and they took it the wrong. They've misinterpreted it. Objectively.

Let's assume your opinion that Tommy Wiseau did not create the film he intended to is correct... Why is that objectively a bad thing? >It's not an opinion. It's established fact. Again, not everything is an opinion. Why is failing a bad thing? Is that what you're asking me right now? >>Yes. Why is failing a bad thing? Answer objectively, not with your opinion >>>I'll just do the full conversation for you. Save us both some time.: Me: "Failing is bad because that is literally the meaning of the word." You: "But you're being subjective." Me: "No I'm not. Failing to achieve your goals is objectively negative. That is what failure is." You: "Subjective" Me: "Well, no. Not really." You: "No it has to be subjective! Objectivity scares me and I don't have the intellectual capacity to actually understand the distinction. So it's easier for me to say that everything is subjective." Me: "Ok" >>>>Buddy roleplaying instead of answering the question >>>>>The comment included the answer. >>>>>>Oh wow that's actually how you would've answered the question, like not as a bit or anything? That's... interesting >>>>>>>Respond to it if you've got an objection. >>>>>>>>Well for starters, failure to accomplish one's initial goal for a work does not automatically make the work bad...

My very first short film compared to barry lyndon Id give the win to barry lyndon Edit: heres proof If you want to see it good luck, its rough ride lol https://youtu.be/plJBLw1SLv0?is=cO67pkARBb6ASXvz >You would. I might not. Doesn’t make it objectively better. >>Come on dude, we all understand the original point from OP to some extent and art is art, but there's absolutely an accepted level of objective quality that we all recognise too. >>>We clearly don’t all understand, otherwise you wouldn’t claim your opinion is objectively true. You are confusing widely held opinion with objective truths. >>>>But i'm not saying my opinion is objectively true, I'm saying that it's more than okay to accept that individual elements of filmmaking can be judged using objective criteria, otherwise it wouldn't be a skilled industry where quality is clearly defined and measured like any other. The same criteria that allows OP to justifiably say that Barry Lyndon is a better movie than his short film, without dolts saying "that's just your opinion". This is just such an exhausting semantic debate that you'd only really find on Reddit, I can't lie lol >>>>>There quite literally can’t be objective criteria as everyone would have their own subjective criteria to judge art. You’re crying about semantics when this has nothing to do with that. You are fundamentally misusing the word “objective” >>>>>>There is quite literally objective criteria in moviemaking, that's just factual. It's taught in academic spaces and has widely recognised thresholds for accepted quality. Things like technical image quality, sound, editing, continuity, composition etc. If you want to argue that an entire movie accidently shot completely out of focus isn't objectively bad because "art is subjective", then have at it. But the overwhelming majority of people won't be on that side of the river with you.

Sources: https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeCode/comments/1vlclpn/claude_watermarking_our_work_is_unethical_and/

https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1vlckt9/claude_watermarking_our_work_is_unethical_and/

HIGHLIGHTS THREAD 1

Most consumers would want to know if something that was created with AI tools, I don’t see a problem with that. >This is such a hopelessly chronically online nerd niche opinion lol >>Maybe contribute to the discussion instead of insulting people for their opinions. >>>He's saying your claim is wrong because of your niche echo chamber type view of the world. >>>>I think you may be in an echo chamber. People absolutely do care what are you smoking >>>>>Is anything I said inaccurate? If not, get lost >>>>>>I’m sure the watermarks are being implemented bc nobody actually cares if text or images are ai generated then? Use your critical thinking skills if you have any

Can you please just write your own posts? >The whole "we were the prompt givers. Claude was merely the conduit for our intention" kinda makes it obvious why watermarks are a good thing, OP >>What matters more? The quality and the nutrition of the food you eat, or who made the food for you? >>>In this case llms would be mcdonalds >>>>And McDonald’s is good/bad because…? >>>>>Me holding my opinion after realizing i cannot fix this person's entire educational history in just one conversation >>>>>>Or maybe have the intelligence to even defend your “opinion”? >>>>>>>You know, usually I'm all for explaining shit to people instead of making a joke at their expense. I really am. But I don't believe you honestly need me to tell you why McDonald's is bad food, so I'm not going to engage.

"I ordered the pizza so I made the pizza" >”I told them to put pepperoni in it and they did exactly that! Are they claiming to be pizza chefs now? They just followed my instructions!” >>Except if you extrapolate that argument out to its conclusion, Claude didn't "make the pizza" either, it amalgamated token and logit weights from thousands of recipes in its training set, so it should attribute all of them. >>>According to this logic, you should also label your homegrown code with every code you have ever read, because you learn to code from somewhere and not born with it. >>>>You learned it because someone willingly taught you, or because you paid for training. That part is missing in the AI world. >>>>>No, I pirated all the books and read gpl code >>>>>>Yeah that would be the illegal option the AI uses as well. Since you're an individual you don't cause a lot of harm but on a global scale it's problematic.

Yeah software development as a whole should have been exempted from the requirements of the AI Act. Code is explicitely exempted but it's not enough: commit messages, PR messages, ADRs, etc, will all get watermarked and I am of the opinion they shouldn't be because every developer uses AI now. >What AI was used might become important in the future. If developers are blind submitting code they don’t or can’t read, we may see particular vulnerabilities emerge. If a model is found to be prone to particular vulnerabilities, you would want to know what code was generated by that model. >>From another comment I made on this post: "Watermarking relies on the use of synonyms. Technical writing (engineering specifications, DDD, etc) uses a fixed lexicon which can't accomodate that use of synonyms. Undue synonyms could really end up being at best confusing at worst dangerous in some sensitive engineering practices or businesses. Some of them are even regulated to be thoroughly precise like aerospace, healthcare and finance." This is legit harmful. >>>I’m also super curious how this will go when it comes to dictation. I dictate a lot of work and shove it into Claude to clean it up. Is it randomly going to change my chosen words around? I usually only get it to put in punctuation etc, not make any changes to what I’ve said. >>>>NLP (natural language processing) is different from Gen AI, so I think it gets a pass. >>>>>he's using NLP to get his voice to text then putting than in Gen AI to clean up the mess , so it still applies >>>>>>If it's only punctuation, and not summarizing or altering the initial wording, it doesn't trigger the Article 50 of the AI Act.

HIGHLIGHTS THREAD 2

It's not claiming credit, it's acknowledging the content is AI created. >how does your calculator watermark your taxes? should your laptop watermark your emails? >>Not relevant. >>>Can you explain how it is not relevant? They are both pieces of technology you use to complete some task. >>>>Yes, it's like asking how your oven watermarks the food you just made or your hammer the table you just made. You made it yourself using tools. AI output isn't something you made yourself. I use AI myself, but I'm not claiming the output is made by me because I wrote the prompt. >>>>>No one is saying the tool isn't doing some heavy lifting here, but watermarking is not the solution to this. All it says is, "This here product was made by Anthropic's models" which is false and greedy. They can't claim to be the main contributor on everything done with their model, just because they trained the model. By that logic, NVIDIA has a claim on the models, since they trained them using NVIDIA's GPUs. After all, the GPUs were a massive contribution to the training process' success. >>>>>>Exactly, all it says that is was made with Anthropic's models. Not more or less. Don't see them claiming anything more. I think it's a plus if I can see something was made by using an AI.

Actually almost all email clents watermark email in headers (iPhone even in text). Same for any office software, graphic software, music software,... - almost all watermarks their outputs. >right. outputs. it does watermark content i provide to it though. that’s the problem. if i upload my own art it gets watermarked as being processed. try knowing what you’re talking about next time >>AI does not watermark content you provide. It watermarks outputs generated form it. If you use graphic software to edit your art it is also watermarked with info what graphic software was used to modify it. Where do you see differnece? In both cases software used to create some output watermarks it by info it was used. >>>"Claude uses two complementary techniques to mark content generated and processed by Claude: (1) watermarks embedded in text, and (2) signed provenance metadata attached to files. https://support.claude.com/en/articles/16266773-how-claude-marks-ai-generated-content" try knowing the topic >>>>Did you just proved yourself wrong while thinking you proved me wrong? >>>>>tell me you didn’t read it without telling me you didn’t read it >>>>>>I read it bit it seems you somehow think that when word watermark does not appear in second half it proves you are right. While this clearly shows that embeded watermark and metatada serves same purpose (marking AI created content) and it poves you re wrong.

i posted anthropics faq. how could i be wrong? are you really going to niggle on the type of marking? >You posted antropic faq tbat proves you wrong because you do not undetstand what it says and assumes it proves you right while it does exact opposite. >>you aren’t even sure what part I’m talking about are you. >>>I am pretty sure you think it proves you right because word watermark is not used in section about file metadata. >>>>I’m pretty sure you’re just saying this because you’re unclear about what I’m talking about. simple question: is your input marked in any way? >>>>>No input is not marked in any way obviously. It is impossible to watermark input. Only outputs can be watermarked. >>>>>>okay. this is wrong. reread anthropics link and then try again. >>>>>>>I reread it an it clearly says only outputs that are result of generation or processing is watermarked. It cannot obviously say inputs are watetmarked because it is literally technically impossible to watermark input. (60 more comments of these two arguing)

You don't own the outputs to Claude. Whatever you get out of Claude was stolen anyway. You can't just claim ownership over stolen goods. When you pay for Claude you pay for a service, not for the output tokens. Can you ask your agent to read the terms and conditions of your subscription and verify whether you own the output? I'm not wasting tokens on slop. If a person steals a phone, and sells you the phone, the phone doesn't become yours. Same logic with LLMs. This sudden urge to "own" Claude is nonsense, illogical and based in a warped perception of reality. >"when you pay for claude you pay for a service, not for the output tokens" You quite literally do pay for the output tokens. They are themselves the service that you are paying for. >>You pay for the compute. Not for the tokens. You don't own the text content of the tokens. Try again. Read the terms and conditions. >>>I pay for the result that it produces, I don't really give a damn what they need to produce that result. If they stop producing the result, I stop paying. >>>>Great. Doesn't mean you own it. Read the terms of conditions if the contract you signed when you got a Claude subscription. >>>>>"Great. Doesn't mean you own it." Please explicitly cite where exactly I claimed that I own anything. You can't, because I never did. >>>>>>then what are you arguing about? why do you care if anthropic puts their watermark on it if you don't own it? >>>>>>>Because I'm paying them for a result that doesn't have a watermark on it. If I wanted a result with a watermark on it, I would generate it with a watermark on it.

It's not a watermark, it's a disclosure. You can tell it not to do it >its literally a watermark >>My bad I missed that announcement. It's for transparency and disclosure, right? To comply with the EU AI Act's Article 50(2) Code of Practice on Transparency of AI-Generated Content It's not about claiming credit >>>I’m tired of the EU making up laws. The eu provides the least innovation and the most garbage legislation. No wonder no tech advancement come out of the eu. >>>>Nice rage bait >>>>>rage bait? I’m not the eu. I’m not constantly making laws even though i don’t provide anything to society other than archaic regulation. it can’t be rage bait because there is nothing to def

For code, it won't change much. The watermarks will be all over dev work as it seems crazy not to use AI to code in these days and age. >The biggest watermark in code isn't even the em-dashes, it's the fact that there's plentiful, coherent comments that actually explain what the code does :p >>My suddenly very detailed git comment history is the real watermark >>>dude yesterday i was looking at this dead code trying to figure out why it was there and stuff like that Claude was like lemme pull the git logs from 8 months ago this became obsolete on such and such day when xyz was introduced and i was like oh git commits, hm...perhaps I treated you too sparsely >>>>It's weird having to see into the mind of someone who types in low IQ case. That was somehow an epiphany for you? Was it somehow not intuitive enough to comprehend without an in-your-face example? >>>>>Annoying dickhead. The primary case of a sentence says more about form of device than iq, which is a shitty metric in itself. >>>>>>Incorrect, again, as usual. Are you insinuating that hitting the shift key on a keyboard is hard (it isn't), or are you insinuating that somehow modern phones don't come with autocorrect (they do). Device has nothing to do with it. You can't even type "IQ" correctly... image

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bumble/comments/1vljedo/bumble_fully_ends_women_message_first_rule_after/

HIGHLIGHTS

Yellow Tinder >Thats Grindr >>Grindr is for republicans though >>>Why are you using gay as an insult? >>>>I'm not. I'm saying grindr is full of republicans which probably doesnt align politically with most gay people. Sharing view points is important to most relationships. >>>>>Are you just playing stupid? The majority users on grinder are liberal >>>>>>Not true. The liberal gays are mostly on Hinge. Grinder is full of the DL guys (mostly Republican). That’s why the app crashes whenever they have a convention >>>>>>>I mean a quick google review says otherwise. This isn’t a debatable topic >>>>>>>>https://www.newsweek.com/grindr-app-crashes-milwaukee-rnc-1927750 Here’s an example, it crashes all the time when republican events are nearby

Damn all the salty dudes in here. Up your game gents. >I love it when the right comments get downvoted. 😂 >>Moving the goal post, gaslighting, personal attack : this is all you're really capable of, as long as it allows you not to question your own behaviour haha Bumble itself shows what everyone has been saying : women say they want one thing, do another, and are overall lazy when it comes to dating, but go ahead and seethe hoooooo >>>As the guy above me said: “Damn all the salty dudes in here. Up your game gents.” 🤷 >>>>Hell yea. Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender You ladies are undefeated. >>>>>And hopefully you heal from whoever hurt you in middle school. Seriously, looking over your comments you’re dealing with “something”. Cheers! >>>>>>This guy sounds like a permanently single man lol, holy fuck what a mess his post history is >>>>>>>A shame really. There’s a lot of girls that like action figures and arcade games! >>>>>>>>There's a lot of girls that like a lot of stuff but the losers in this sub will never find out lol, crazy you got downvoted for pointing out how sad this entire thread is

Jesus christ, calm down >Why? Tell us one thing that is wrong about his statement? Does it sound a bit toxic? Sure - but it is what is honestly. >>“Not a single set of guts between them” when this is a dating app, it wasn’t exactly 100% of women who were consulted about this decision, and not even 100% of the surveyed women agreed. Chalking that up to “all women are gutless” sounds more like hating women than anything else. >>>It is a question of following what is the most likely to succeed and earn them money. 66 women giving money > 34 women giving you money >>>>Was that meant for a different comment? >>>>>"not even 100% of the surveyed women agreed." Among other aspects, i answer to this They don't need to all agree ; when conducting such research, we are looking for a majority, a trend, here, the specific 66 women out of 100 who tend not to want to message first >>>>>>That has nothing to do with my comment. My comment was not about the efficacy of research and what a representative sample looked like. It was about how you can’t generalize a single statistic to all women and categorize them from it. Are you a bot? >>>>>>>Precisely... you need to generalise to understand and decide, here for bumble co. to guarantee revenues Generalising doesn't mean including each and every person under an idea, it means noting a trend, and admitting within the general premise that there are exceptions and individual cases If we always have to consider exceptions, details, particular cases, we just cannot think

☕️ >sending "hi" to a guy you are open to talking to was simply too much emotional labor >>Oh but if they send just “hi” men complain about the low-effort Edit : women also complain about low effort, my point is just that saying “hi” wouldn’t be enough. Edit 2 : I AGREE IT’S LOW EFFORT GUYS I am just pointing that even if women said “hi” there would be (justified) complaints. (Didn’t expect to ruffle so many feathers lol - if you downvoted, feel free to tell me why you think I’m wrong, I’m opened :)) >>>Men demand that women be everything. What else is new 😤😤😤 >>>>No, men demand women not be hypocritical, and to engage in behaviors that they criticize about men. >>>>>Genuine question, do you believe hypocrisy is just a women issue? >>>>>>Where did they even imply that?

Real, single, Women are the most valuable asset any dating app can have. If women are saying they don’t like a part of your app or service then that will hurt the app long term. >Losing your differentiating factor that allowed you to service a niche as the best product in a massive industry will also hurt your app long term. But okay. Bumble will now become slop where men don’t message and women don’t message so nobody meets and uninstalls. Why use it over hinge or tinder which are both superior depending on what you want? >>They don't care about differentiation. They've got their name out and a userbase >>>But they aren’t the best product now. They’re probably a #3 for apps that do the exact same thing. There’s no point in having it at all anymore. It’s like if a company built its identity around servicing air conditioners and now wants to be a developer. There’s zero reason to select them. >>>>There's no point for you. They're still making their money >>>>>Ask any guy who uses dating apps, I can promise you that the majority who made their way to Bumble did it purely because of the whole “woman first” aspect of it. Now it’s just Tinder with a different name and colour scheme. >>>>>>People pay for Tinder and Hinge, they'll pay for Bumble. Having a similar model with competitors doesn't stop people from paying. There are lots of other apps that people pay premium for, despite them not being larger, not being any different from Tinder/Hinge, and not having any unique selling points. People will still pay.

I don't understand how women are this bad at dating 😂 Edit, reading the article more fully: "Low-Effort Openers Will Get Flagged Bumble is also trying to stop the new system from becoming a flood of lazy first messages. The app will detect low-effort openers, such as one-word messages, and prompt users to write something more thoughtful before sending." The absolute irony that men will now be the ones to do all the messaging and will be expected to open with more than 'hi' after so many years of women doing just this. I ain't even mad, it's just....chef's kiss >They don’t need to be good unfortunately >>Then why can't they admit they have dating so much easier than men? >>>it's hard in ways you are not capable of understanding because you lack empathy >>>>Its not hard. Women think because its not perfect they don't have it massively easier. Women are the ones who don't have empathy because they can't understand how hard men have it. >>>>>It’s wild that you guys just don’t get it. You feel rejected and that feels hard. They feel threatened, and that feels harder >>>>>>Also women dont get to say what feels harder since they would rather have their safety threatened then their egos. Thats why they refuse to approach. Just look at their choices. Women arent choosing what is more difficult. >>>>>>>I never said it was 'harder.' Because I understand that only losers play the Suffering Olympics. I said it was 'hard in ways you don't understand.' Because you are describing women's experiences as 'easy' and 'not hard.' As if you have a clue. I don't care... You can be the biggest victim if that makes you happy.

how is this getting upvotes? wtf is with the weird gender war mentality in these comments?? of course women don’t feel the need to initiate conversations when they’re the minority on apps AND centuries of social conditioning discouraged and punished women for initiating. a lot of men still feel emasculated when a woman gets down on one knee to propose. both genders obviously receive social conditioning and that takes a long time to change. can we let go of the weird boys vs. girls shit? this isn’t kindergarten >You can call it the gender war, or call it a psy-op, or call it whatever you like. But when legions of men have the same experiences, same shit luck, and same stories, there might be something there worth investigating, regarding the caliber of the women that are in the marketplace. Gay men don't have this much trouble finding partners, so why do straight men? >>Well if we're going off "legions of this gender having the same experience", I guess men are finally accepting that its worth investigating why so many women have stories of being sexually assaulted/harassed by men? Right? Or does that not fit the narrative here? >>>Statistics everywhere show it's a relatively small portion of the population, who are repeat offenders, who have an outsized impact on the rest of the population. So we're back to the question of, "Why are women such shitty judges of character?" Women are these wonderful creatures, who are more emotionally aware, emotionally available, have a higher EQ, and all the rest of it. Yet so many of them end up divorced in their 30s or 40s, with a couple of kids in tow, that it's worth questioning just how good their judgement is. >>>>They all focus their intuition to smell out incls instead of abusers lmao >>>>>Abusers get laid, and they can "fix" him. Incls don't. >>>>>>As if being inc*l was a guarantee of not being an abuser. As if.

i'm a straight woman - equality is for laws and the work place. Unless men can go through periods, labor and pregnancy, hetero dating is never ever going to be "equal" and instead of trying to make it so, it's a much better approach to make yourself an attractive prospect to the people you want to attract ;) Because, if a man isn't trying to make it EQUITABLE (not equal) I would rather be single and I think most women are also of that mentalit >Ah so just shining light on all the hardships women face and ignoring the hardships of men, very equitable! Like you say this like its way easier being a man when its just not. >>Men don't go through biological injury specifically because of having a relationship with a woman. Men have their own issues in the world, but it's simply not the same thing. >>>even if we say, you are right, because we are aiming for perfect justice right? it wont work, you know why? because the side content for men for entertainment is getting better and better and more, i just watched the new partner robots in china, stuff is insane, so even if women deserve given more in relationships by their partner, they will get less and less because thats how humans are, if there is an easier alternative, the motivation for chasing real women will be reduced, so yes, most will end up old singles, men and women, who will more suffer from it? i dont konw, i just know i that i love ai, videogames, robots, porn, and my single life is getting better and better, also focus is heavily on female robots, because demand from men is 7times bigger for that, compared for womens demand on male robots, so men will get their toys first, because of capitalism >>>>I mean ... a sex slave robot isn't cheap. if men took some of the resources you deem worthy of a sex robot to their real female partners (who, by the way, in context of this forum are requesting men message them first - not 100k cash like a sex robot would demand) then they would probably wind up with living partners. >>>>>in 10years, they will be like a car in expensese i guess, not everyone need a ferari >>>>>>a car still costs like 40k every 6 years + gas and maitenence. Also, you usually need a car to go to work. you don't need a sex robot, and if you do need sex that bad - then maybe they should have been nicer to women? so all the men are going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on sex robots in their lifetime, and won't take a woman out on a date or message her first. I say PLEASE go buy the sex robots and leave us alone. i can't wait for sex robots.

You think a century is long in the lens of history? I get the point you’re making, but you’re massively downplaying the lasting societal effects of personally and legally oppressing a group for thousands of years. And most women definitely don’t say or think their lives are terrible, where are you getting this? Slavery ended a century and half ago. Are our systems and society completely free of prejudice towards black people now? >no. but then again the topic was never about slavery or black people now was it? i’m sure the gen Z passenger princess divas posting thirst pics on instagram and tiktok for rich dudes to reply to are just living in agonizing misery rn./s >>And you wonder why you having trouble with dating >>>who said he had trouble dating? >>>>His bitterness it’s a pretty good indicator >>>>>plenty of bitter people are in relationships.

Dude just say you hate women. Way less words >EDIT: I was giving the earlier commenter more credit than the dude is worth. After another response from him, he's not a nuanced dude and just seems insecure. I think he hates their privilege in this arena while they play victim, and princess. Combine those toxic elements with OF grifters and scammers, and maybe you'll understand why some people are angry. Hating a capitalist system that uses predatory behaviors to pit people against each other(while you're dealing with loneliness) doesn't make you an incel, bud. Source: about a half dozen queer women I know have the same complaints about dating women as a lot of these dudes. >>women have been throwing themselves at rich, powerful and handsome men long before capitalism was even a thing. capitalism just allows them to do it easier now but it’s not the cause. their biological hypergamous nature is. you’ve got girls on this very site straight up saying that they can be average themselves but would rather share a chad with other women than date an average guy exclusively for themselves. >>>Oh man, I was giving you credit and tried to help by showing a nuanced view. Clearly I gave you too much credit as you just sound as toxic as the women I was referring to. Best of luck with healing. >>>>it’s true. this is the trend that has been proliferating for about 15 years now, ever since the apps showed up. it’s also contributing partially to the fertility crisis which is currently putting us on a slow path to extinction. >>>>>Hey bud, we're not in agreement here. It sounds like you're repeating talking points of millionaires/billionaires about how we need more humans. At no point of this planet has there ever been more humans, and you know that's true. This is no fertility crisis: it's simple math. Like I said, best of luck healing; but you sound like a bot that copies lines from the JRE podcast. >>>>>>The population issue isn't some 'billionaire talking point'. It's a simple fact that we have insufficient number of young people being born to support those not working.

Source:

HIGHLIGHTS

I mean yeah but how else are conservatives supposed to win political points by marginalizing people they don't like? >It's so insane. A vast majority of trans people just want to have basic human rights and be left the fuck alone, yet Conservatives have so much unending ire towards them. I do not comprehend why it is so hard for some people to just have basic respect for others. >>What human right are they lacking exactly? >>>Can't use the bathroom is a big one. >>>>They can go to the correct bathroom designated for their sex. >>>>>It gets weirder when a trans man that has done hormone treatment, has a full beard and looks like a trucker, is forced to go in the women's bathroom. Or a trans woman who never went through puberty with testosterone, being forced into a men's bathroom. >>>>>>For sure, there's no easy solution. But I'd suggest the other solution is worse. Most trans aren't passing and really the main people we want to protect are little girls from perverted men who abuse the self-ID and PC culture which make people avoid conflict. >>>>>>>Your problem doesn't exist. It's a manufactured issue in order to create outrage, and focus on something other than what's actually important. Who are all these perverted trans women?

Conservative here with no hate towards them but I want them to actually get the help they need (which isn’t letting them go on with their delusion) >There is extensive evidence that gender dysphoria is a real issue that people are born with, and can be treated with hormone replacement therapy and surgery, doctors prescribe it. Just because you've been told that they're delusional doesn't mean they are. >>There is extensive evidence that gender dysphoria is a real issue that people are born with, and can be treated with hormone replacement therapy and surgery, doctors prescribe it. Just because you've been told that they're delusional doesn't mean they are. >>>Gender dysphoria may be real but the solution isn’t to pump them with drugs >>>>How the fuck do you know that? Are you a doctor or a neurologist? Someone who knows a lot of trans people? No. You're someone who's parroting opinions given to you by right wing grifters, you're barely sentient. >>>>>No I’m not a doctor but pumping people with any drugs isn’t a long term solution to any problem >>>>>>It literally is >>>>>>>“People selling kids drugs say it is beneficial to sell kids drugs”. Again, I said long term and 1 year is not long term. There’s other solutions to these problems that don’t take a doctor, who has a financial incentive to give them that type of treatment, to be able to come up with. >>>>>>>>This might be the dumbest shit I've ever read. Congrats

don't go to r/WNBAgossips/ it's all they talk about. total hate circlejerk >Holy shit it’s like r/wnba and r/conservative had an unholy union

This isn't a problem. This is caused 100% by grifters trying to hype up a controversy so they can get attention and money >Right so Kanter is allowed to play in the WNBA or isnt? >>Has that been an issue at all? >>>In the WNBA, no. In sports it has come up, and should be codified. >>>>They already have rules. In most sports where these rules are being passed there's 0 actual trans athletes because these rules aren't solving an actual problem >>>>>You dont always wait for a problem arise before making rules. I get people think its bothering trans people, but if the WNBA does not have rules on the books to stop Kanter from entering the league, there should probably make some. >>>>>>People like Kanter don't actually want to play and won't get drafted. He's a grifter trying to get attention and money >>>>>>>So ignore it and let men enter the league, even if its a grift? Is that your stance? >>>>>>>>There aren't any men entering the league

This is a fake controversy. There are no trans women in the WNBA or playing women's college basketball. I really wish we would stop giving Cant Play Kanter the attention he seems to be begging for >Trans women playing in the wnba will happen though, why not bring in guidelines now to prevent people like kanter using it to make a point? >>Being eligible for the draft doesn't mean you have to get drafted. They can say "okay yes enes kanter is a woman and is allowed to be drafted" then no team drafts him >>>Enes Kanter would be the best player in the WNBA by a mile. Are you saying they won’t draft him because he’s not good enough to play in the WNBA? >>>>No, they won’t draft him because he’s a man. And a dipshit. >>>>>He identifies as a woman. >>>>>>Actually he was too much of a pussy to actually say that (and let it get clipped) in his “statement” >>>>>>>Pussy as in weak? That’s extremely chauvinistic >>>>>>>>Weak bait

So you suggest waiting until after there are trans players in the wnba to institute the ban? Or what? >I'm saying this is a stupid conversation and it's not worth discussing at all right now >>Unfortunately, they are being forced to do so. Kanter, Royce White, and the rest will go through with it and then it's too late. >>>"go through with it" I will give you $1000 dollars if either of those fucks takes a year of HRT and actually transitions >>>>Did you miss the entire point? The WNBA does not require the use of HRT, it doesn't require anything at all other than calling yourself a woman. This is why they have to change the rules. >>>>>And it was never an issue until someone purposely did this to GET YOU STIRRED UP CONGRATS! you fell for the classic right wing trap >>>>>>Trapped into what? Writing a clear gender eligibility rule? Obviously, Kanter is acting in bad faith but it's not like this could never be an issue just because it hasn't been.

Go through with what? The league should just ignore their stupid political stunts. They aren't worthy of a response or even acknowledgement. >The second they do that, they open themselves up to lawsuits. It's bullshit, but it's what they want. >>Cant Play Kanter does not have the legal right to be drafted by a team >>>Based on what? >>>>I am saying he does not have the inviolable right to be drafted by a team. His lawsuit would go nowhere >>>>>So you would allow him to take part in the draft? >>>>>>Why not? He won’t get drafted, he’ll cry about it like he cries about everything else, then nothing happens >>>>>>>Because the next lawsuit would be for collusion. Kanter or White are probably good enough to play in the WNBA. And even if they aren't, eventually one of these assholes will be. So that's a discrimination lawsuit as well. I repeat, it's all bullshit, but I have no problem with the WNBA talking about this to figure out a smart way to deal with it. >>>>>>>>How do you sue for collusion? Why aren’t players suing the NBA for collusion every year when they go undrafted?

God can we just leave trans people the fuck alone already? There are zero trans women in the wnba. Idiots are just using the W as a vehicle for hatred >There is nothing currently in the rule book to stop men from saying im a women now and playing. >>You’re right - but also I think there is a diffence between someone who’s socially transitioned and who’s been on hormones for years vs someone declaring he’s a woman in bad faith to prove a point >>>There probably are, but if there's no objective way of distinguishing the 2, there's a major problem. Like, to me, a good % of modern trans are confused and made a bad decision or are bad faith. In Canada, we've had a few criminals go to prison and declare they're women now, and bam, transferred to a women's prison. And surprise surprise! They raped female prisoners! >>>>I mean if you wanna stick to ‘objective’ as a caveat then you’re basically relieving yourself from criticism. These are people with histories of right wing grifts and getting involved with political parties, people and groups who quite literally want us (us meaning trans women) dead. For the record I do think that standards past self identification matters in institutional settings, though there is a difference between bringing up a concern to find a solution vs bringing up a concern as a Trojan horse to spread hate - and I’m not open to discussing finding solutions to people who actively associate themselves with those who want us dead >>>>>The vast majority of right wingers don't want you dead. They just don't want to indulge your delusion. That's pretty normal. It's called tough love. We don't indulge schizos either. We give them coping techniques that allow them to live amongst people as best they can. Same should happen with people with gender dysphoria. Forcing everyone else to change ain't the move. Maybe Enes isn't so invested in having you die... but maybe more invested in protecting young women from men who might abuse self-ID. Or maybe just people who want scientists to speak freely about this without fear of gender activists smearing them. Or maybe they don't want activists teaching anxious kids radicalise life-altering ideas that lead to irreversible damage. >>>>>>And yet, they actively and openly associate and proudly break bread next to people who do. Way I see it, if you openly and happily hang around bigots then you are one yourself because you are basically enabling that behavior. That goes for any trump voter in 2024 to be clear. If you did it “for the economy, but I don’t wanna hurt anyone” - fuck you, you put these people in power and now so many are suffering cause of you (17 more comments of these two arguing)

Olympic already did this. They even research how biological men (on Gender affirming hormone therapy) have advantages over women. Why are we still discussing this? This is one of the reason TRUMP won. >Trump won because dumbasses are addicted to culture war debates that solve nonexistent problems. I agree >>Trump won because the majority of the country is conservative. And because the Democrats aggresively lost the plot on liberal issues. >>>And because they rigged three straight primaries for corporate lackeys, so they had to run on culture war issues. Which was a layup for the Republicans. >>>>Those culture war issues were fomented by the left, they have no one else to blame. >>>>>Absolute bullshit. They are fomented by the right, and then the left responds. We were pretty settled on LGBT+ rights in this country and moving forward as a society until the right came screeching about them again, trying to take away even the progress we made like with same-sex marriage. This is like how the right accuses the left of "class warfare" for trying to just bring back a stable middle/working class after the super-rich decimated it. >>>>>>The left can't unelaterally decide when it's time for new social standards to settle in. Does the country look to you like people are settled on LGBT+ rights? When people are ready we will see change, regardless of which party is running things. >>>>>>>"The left can't unelaterally decide when it's time for new social standards to settle in." They didn't, legal same-sex marriage was settled by a bipartisan Supreme Court. The right can't unilaterally decide they want to pull us back to the 1950s.

It's hilarious how i've never heard a peep from these chuds about trans men but I can write a book on how much they harp on trans women. >it's all a useless distraction but it's because Trans men don't have a physical advantage over men. again I want to reiterate that it's all a useless distraction. >>yes, that’s exactly the point. Trans women do have a physical advantage over women. >>>No they don’t. There is literally zero scientific data backing this. >>>>So Lia Thomas, the trans swimmer, won a national title and broke female records because???? >>>>>Because she’s great at swimming >>>>>>she was ranking around 250-500 of male collegiate swimmers. Then she breaks records competing against women, and your response is that she’s just a great swimmer? So the women she beat, they don’t matter whatsoever to you? >>>>>>>A collegiate swimmer coming in 7th instead of 6th does not matter whatsoever to me, correct >>>>>>>>But the women who had her records taken away…fuck them right?

Just a joke of a league. “We’re meeting to decide what it means to be a woman to play in the Women’s NBA”. >Am I crazy that if the name of the league is “Women’s… then defining what that is, isn’t crazy >>It's a (women's basketball) league. The only requirement should be that you've played high-level women's basketball... which those two grifters obviously fail. If Engelbert doesn't just state that... she will have failed at her job (again). It's not the WNBA's job to set a highly controversial regulatory precedent. >>>Sounds like you’d just be pushing the problem down to college women’s basketball? The reality is someone is gonna have to address it eventually. >>>>The WNBA would still have their definition of woman. It will just be the broadest definition set internationally by doctors and FIBA. They wouldn't want to put their own restrictions on anything. But if the best feeder systems/leagues limit trans participation, there wouldn't be much they can do. >>>>>Right, so they’d be pushing the problem onto someone else. >>>>>>No, ideally there would be top-down pressure to follow the international standards.

No person that has gone through puberty as a male should be allowed to compete in women’s sports. There, I solved the problem for all of you. >That sounds exclusionary, many people can't choose to change before puberty. >>Sucks to suck >>>Joke for you, reality to most. >>>>Life isn't fair. Sorry. Nobody is entitled to professional sports. >>>>>So you think, that's why folks like me are championing and using our energy to make sure justice is served.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/wisconsin/comments/1vdszya/francesca_hong_rallies_with_ilhan_omar_and_hasan/

Context: Francesca Hong is the current front runner for the democratic nomination for governor in Wisconsin (in what has been an absolute clusterfuck of a race). She is also progressive candidate.

HIGHLIGHTS

I dont get why people keep hitching themselves to Hasan. Only Hasan's fans like Hasan. Everyone else, most the left included, rightfully dislikes him. Why is this their guy? >I didn’t know he had fans. Dog abusers suck. >>You clearly haven't watched his streams if you think he abuses Kaya. >>>So everyone calling him out for mistreating her months ago was wrong? >>>>No, his fans are delusional and super active on the internet. The guy had a huge dog stuck in a corner on a platform about as big as the dog for hours on end every day and he couldn't get his story straight for a while. The shock collar was a much smaller problem in comparison. He 100% abused his dog but it was out of ignorance and he's the kind of guy that will never admit fault. >>>>>There's no evidence that he shocked his dog. It's delusional to believe that. >>>>>>There is evidence, there is no proof is what you mean to say. Regardless, it is not the main problem the main problem has over a year worth of his own streams of proof. >>>>>>>"Regardless, it is not the main problem the main problem has over a year worth of his own streams of proof." Except there isn't. That's not true. >>>>>>>>I mean anyone can go look at his vods from 2025 and see you're clearly living in lala land (17 more comments of these two arguing)

She is bi-polar and has mental issues. WOW you people are really grasping >Who is bi-polar? What are you talking about? >>Know your candidate >>>I have no idea what that has to do with my comment >>>>Hong is bipolar, had a stay at a mental hospital, has cutting issues, and overdosed. Also noted her own anxiety attacks. >>>>>Ok so she's relateable? Lmao is that supposed to sound like a bad thing😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅 >>>>>>But not leadership material. >>>>>>>And again not true. Why would i NOT want someone with sinilar experiences to govern my state? >>>>>>>>Democrats has like 8 other choices and appears to choose poorly

I’m struggling to understand how this is supposed to help win in a swing state like Wisconsin at all. This is a race for democrats to lose, and this is a good start at doing just that. >Young people love Hasan and Ilhan, and young people are necessary to win. What’s so hard to understand? >>Most young people dont even know who hasan is. He is just there to push hisnown agenda, which doesnt align with democrats. He is not a democrat >>>He’s trying to save the Democratic Party from its corporate owners that want the party to wither and continue losing. The only way to move the party forward is by committing to supporting working people over those corporate interests. The centrists that want to continue licking corporate boots will sink the country and left fascism take over because their incremental “solutions” aren’t bold enough to improve material conditions for most Americans. >>>>Read closely: He. Is. Not. A. Democrat. >>>>>Yeah, he’s what all Democrats should aspire to be. Did you even read my comment? If the mainstream Dems don’t get very anti-billionaire and super progressive, they will not defeat fascism. It’s socialism or barbarism. >>>>>>Nothing you said makes Hasan a democrat. He is not a democrat. >>>>>>>FDR understood that social programs are necessary to deal with the excesses of capitalism, otherwise society falls apart. Was that socialism? Sure. Was it necessary? Also yes. Is FDR enough of a Democrat for you? I’d argue he’s one of the best Democrats in US history.

Right winters aren't going to vote for her because of her policies and she's hanging out with this idiot and spending all of her time with his community insulting normal democrats. Who is supposed to be a part of the winning coalition here? >Anti-semites >>Being against genocide isn't anti-semitic. It seems more anti-semitic to imply that all Jews are pro-genocide, don't you think? >>>Let’s just say I posted a picture of the sword he hangs up in one of his room and now I have a strike on his account. Hint sword shape starts with an S >>>>A Scimitar? Wtf are you talking about? >>>>>He has a swastika sword. He says it's just a Bleach sword (and it is) but he's admittedly not a fan of Bleach... so why did he buy the swastika sword (which he explicitly calls the swastika sword) >>>>>>What is a western political streamer doing with a swastika anyways (especially since he has an anti-Israel which is fine to me fyi). I just don’t take his excuses >>>>>>>I mean, I assume it's just rage bait on his part, since we're in the era of rage bait. He's still a piece of shit though for sure >>>>>>>>Rage baiting with a swastika is antisemitism no matter what way you take it.

She’s got her supporters but the L is incoming on this one >Right? I wanted to like her but this leaves a real bad taste in my mouth >>A worse taste than Tiffany? >>>I mean Hasan is openly antisemitic >>>>Not defending anything but I find him to be more anti-Zionist. However, Hong appearing on piker's podcast was not good in the eyes of the Wisconsin Jewish community. >>>>>image Photo of how he uses his sword. The podcaster he brandished it at is Jewish. No excuses. >>>>>>lol, such bullshit hate smearing. >>>>>>>I don’t understand how you can’t see why a swastika sword in a western man’s apartment is offensive. Not smearing. He literally calls it a swastika sword himself

I'm going to vote for her because I'll never vote for another AIPAC candidate again. HOWEVER joining up with these two is a really bad act of PR. Particularly with Piker. He's just a dog abusing, pure communist. He wore a Mao cosplay uniform in China. Not a good look if you want any centrist votes. >Adding he also recently hit backlash for framing a newspaper of the day after 9/11 on his wall for his stream... same guy who said America deserved 9/11. >>image This is the newspaper you're talking about, it was from New York Times on Sept 12 2001 the day after 9/11, it's a historical piece that alot of people own and frame, nothing wrong with him having one tbh >>>...The guy who said America deserved 9/11 framed a photo of the attacks and put it on his wall to show off...? >>>>it was a gift from his friend QTCindrella (another livestreamer, and one of his podcast cohosts) >>>>>Doesn't make it worth framing front and center after being known for saying us deserves it. And point proven again it's bad bad bad PR to be anywhere that guy and stand a chance >>>>>>he said that 7 years ago and apologized the next day, very weird standard to hold him to almost a decade later tbh >>>>>>>You've heard the saying... 9/11 never forget. And some of us can't. Saw it with my young eyes at 7yes old. And then for years on repe5with annoying coverage of it >>>>>>>>You saw it at 7 and had no understanding or context to why it happened, and it seems that is still the case almost 25 years later? Fascinating.

Just about the worst possible thing she could do for the general. >Really? I can think of far worse >>Campaigning with an open communist is probably close to one of the sillier things she could do from a campaign strategy Standpoint >>>A closeted commie is one thing, but an open communist?!? gasp, clutches pearls >>>>Just doing the voter math. How many votes from the far left has she not already picked up vs how many will she lose when people see her campaigning with a communist. We’re trying to win elections here not virtue signal. >>>>>They're probably trying to drive up the historically low youth vote. And calling Hassan an "open communist" is definitely some pearl clutching >>>>>>Calling a communist a communist is Pearl clutching now? >>>>>>>He doesn't call himself a communist, as far as I'm aware. In general though this isn't the 50s, let's stop with the red scare fear mongering. >>>>>>>>Uh do you ever watch Hasan? He’s 100% a communist. He espouses Marxist ideas. He frequently uses communist terminology and arguments in discussion. He has very clear views on the abolishment of capital. Like he is 100% a communist. Call a spade a spade it is what it is. Doesn’t have to be an insult, but it’s 100% what he is.

People in the comment section seem to be gunning for a TT win. Wild >No dude. Criticizing a campaign is needed to win an election. Criticism does not mean we support the opponent >>I believe you are right to an extent. I believe we are seeing that extent here. I’m not against criticism, I’m against people jumping on a hate bandwagon and nitpicking to the point where the opposition gets handed the win. Does that make sense? >>>I agree that there’s people criticizing in bad faith, yes, and there’s probably a decent amount of this. However a lot of people will use this as an excuse to dismiss criticisms entirely. I think Reddit is probably one of the best places to criticize this campaign because it’s virtually entirely left wing people here, so it largely doesn’t affect the general election >>>>Okay I was with you until the end there, you really think Reddit is mostly left? This place is a right wing cesspool. I think you’re the one living in a bubble. >>>>>Idk where you’ve been looking because this subreddit specifically and Reddit as a whole is incredibly left leaning. Polling consistently shows this >>>>>>….sure man. Guess I’ve seen different >>>>>>>I think people are confusing liberalism with being a leftist/progressive.

Ah the Destiny and H3H3 crowd beat me to this one. Hasan isn't a demon. Omar is a great representative. Motivate the left and you'll have a young, enthusiastic base of volunteers. Go Hong. >Do you really think that’s the only explanation for someone might not like Hasan? >>You could also only have seen out of context clips and never listened to him actually speak. There is a difference between simply not liking someone and whatever weird vitriol Hasan Piker receives. >>>It’s cult behavior to believe that the only reason someone might dislike your leader is due to the fact that what they’ve seen is out of context. I am personally bothered by the fact that he was the largest political live streamer and he didn’t encourage his audience to vote against Trump. >>>>Again, there is a difference between simply disliking someone and the weird vitriol Piker gets online. And he explicitly said that people in swing states should vote against Trump. >>>>>Where did he say people in swing states should vote for Harris? >>>>>>While streaming. >>>>>>>I don’t think this is true lol.

All the Tiffany bots in the comments trying to trash on Hong and Pyker because of misinformation like "hasan abuses his dog" or "hong is seeming like a communist more and more". I will personally say that i am not fucking stupid and that these sound like things a republican voter would say trying to sound like a democratic candidate voter. >Your account is 15 days old, called ch33s3head8, and is posting in the Wisconsin subreddit during primary season. Do you not realize how you calling other people bots seems like a pot calling the kettle black type situation. >>I’ve actually got more of a problem with accounts that hide their comments (as yours does) can’t easily determine their agenda or where they are most active. Hide your details and I’m likely to assume you are a bot or here to just stir shit. >>>It would be hypocritical if I was the one to start the conversation going “I hate all these bots” while hiding the information on my profile. Also, the one trying to stir shit is probably the one accusing everyone who disagrees with them of being bots lol. >>>>Honestly it’s pretty easy to see this subreddit has been swarmed by astroturfing and bots. If accounts are afraid of their comments on this subreddit and hiding them I’ve got very little interest in their commentary. >>>>>Who do you think the astroturfing is in favor of, because I have only seen posts about Hong in this subreddit except for when someone drops out. >>>>>>There was a Crawley post here just a few hours ago, maybe you need to just set your feed to new instead of popular and you will see other candidates are getting posts. Hong however seems to be the focus (positive and negative) as she currently leads in the polls. >>>>>>>She was the focus before she was leading. The vast majority of the posts centering any candidate have been made about her and the vast majority have been positive. To not acknowledge this is dishonest.

I just, is she even trying to win the general? >She’s showing who she truly is. Redditors love her. Most people don’t. >>Get off Reddit and you’d see you’re wrong. >>>*intelligent people love her >>>>Dog have you forgotten we live in a swing state, Im begging you >>>>>Did republican lite win in 2024 or 2016? >>>>>>Did Evers win?

I personally don’t see what the big deal is. Omar is well liked by her district and Hasan will draw in a big crowd >Omar is well liked "in her district" which is to say a very small population of somalians who settled in that area. There are very few places in the US outside of her bubble that she would even be considered ok, much less liked. >>Delusional, Omar is a proved and beloved incumbent. >>>Once again, beloved by her sycophants. Take her out of Minnesota and I doubt she wins any election. Americans don't usually love terrorist supporting people in either party. >>>>"Take her out of Minnesota and I doubt she wins any election." Well, she’s doing a good job by the metrics. "Representative Ilhan Omar is popular (net favorability +38), universally known among likely voters (99% name ID), and has 70% job approval. https://changeresearch.com/ilhan-for-congress-primary-results/ Americans don’t usually love terrorist supporting people in either party" Bud, you are going to have to be more specific with that kind of slander. Opposing terror and genocide funded by the American government on behalf of Israel in Gaza, the West Bank, and Southern Lebanon is not considered pro-terrorism. >>>>>So I say she's popular in her area but not nationwide, and your argument is sending me stats from her area? 759 people is not exactly a large sample size. Illhan Omar is on the record as asking judges to go lenient on people looking to join ISIS from the United States. >>>>>>I’m saying with facts that your argument she isn’t established is bunk. Source on your claim, I don’t think seeking interventions for people vulnerable to radicalism like ISIS is a bad thing. I want that same heat for dual citizens who travel to serve in the IOF or return after committing war crimes.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinfuriating/comments/1vbv7il/why_texas_is_lamebesides_the_cowboys/

HIGHLIGHTS

Yeah we gotta start mass reporting Joe Rogan to the police and see how they justify not arresting him. His governor buddy will tip him off so he isn’t caught >just an absolute loser mindset right here. reddit really attracts these freaks. >>If it’s a felony, rich powerful assholes should be charged too >>>nobody should be charged. it's not affecting anybody if Joe Rogan smokes weed in his club or house. just weak, dumb, and a boot licker. >>>>but why should he get a free pass when no one else does? >>>>>I think everybody should get a free pass. i wouldn't want my worst enemy to get arrested for weed in Texas. I don't think anyone should get in trouble for anything without directly effecting other people. it's just stupid as fuck to want someone to get arrested and charged just because "everyone else does". literal bots on here. >>>>>>My account is 10 years old buddy lol

'Dont Mess With Texas' was a campaign by the Texan DOT to encourage Texans to stop littering so much on highways, cuz apparently they're giant slobs. They take it to mean badassery now. >Visiting Texas alone at a hotel for a week, got bored and figured, "eh, lets pop open porn hub." - finding it's blocked made me laugh. This is the 'Freedom' state, right? Yet you have less freedoms in Texas than you have in NY >>Try owning a uterus or even presenting as female in America. Our rights change with every state line crossed. >>>Everyone's rights change when every state line is crossed (definition of state laws). Yes, I agree there are more laws about women's reproductive systems across state lines which is the point your making. Rephrase. >>>>You added nothing to the conversation. >>>>>You added nothing as well and "Our rights change with every state line crossed. " so did this statement. >>>>>>You just failed to understand what they were saying. Not every comment needs to be analysed like a piece of literature. Telling them to "rephrase" at the end of your comment sounds pompous and quite dickish.

Up to 2 years for a gram of weed is insane. >Thats if you are a seller and you are selling unregulated weed That is not for possession as a user >>Possession as a user is still a felony though
image >>>All of you are posting disinformation. This is specifically about chemically isolated altnoids like delta 8 and 10 >>>>The post you’re commenting on is specifically about THC PRODUCTS. The article I posted is specifically about THC PRODUCTS. The law in Texas that goes into effect today is about THC PRODUCTS. >>>>>No. The media is reporting this all wrong, which is why everybody in this thread is insisting you get decades in jail for a few grams of weed >>>>>>Ok so tell me what happens if you get caught with a canned THC beverage that was formerly legal. >>>>>>>Depends if it was an altnoid >>>>>>>>The way the law reads, 2-20 years in prison.

Great point but holy fucking HELL are they being serious with that life imprisonment sentence for less than a damn pound of weed?? Edit: I’m aware a pound is a lot of weed, but they’re talking about 400 grams… that’s .88 pounds. Thats a lot to be sure but that is NOT life imprisonment a lot, and this is a hill I’ll gladly die on. >I mean, that's 14 oz, as a heavy daily smoker in canada where it's legal; that'd be a year+ supply for me so anyone with that is definitely selling; so, there's no real difference between that amount and say, 20 pounds. it makes sense if they just want to catch anyone privately selling; who doesn't register as a business because then they'd only get a fine, ololol wtf. It's still completely ridiculous and insane though. >>You are not a heavy smoker if 14 Oz is a year supply for you. It's pretty easy to go through an 8th a day. I wouldn't consider smoking 3x 1 gram joints a day heavy use. >>>You cant be serious. 1/8 a day is insane >>>>8th a day is like 3 and a half 1 1/4 size joints, that gets blown through by like 2 pm most days >>>>>Such a waste. Get a bong or something yo >>>>>>Got a bong got vapes just have to reload the shit more often. The real answer is stop smoking as much or take a tolerance break but who wants to do that.

Well I guess get stoned in another state then? >Land of the “Free” >>II hope you get help for your drug addiction. >>>I hope you leave people alone to live their lives the way they choose. >>>>"But how does pèdophilia affect you PERSONALLY?" lmao you right-wingers sure are funny. In a laughing at you kind of way. >>>>>Right winger?!? Are you having a stroke? Do you require medical assistance? >>>>>>" Who, ME?????!?!?!?!" That doesn't work anymore lol >>>>>>>Nothing I said would even remotely imply I am a right winger. >>>>>>>>We can sense MAGA trolls from a mile away.

What addiction? >Step 1: Denial. >>You're addicted to denial? >>>Step 0. Cognitive impairment. >>>>I'm sorry for your loss? >>>>>I'm not the one crying over my drug being banned? >>>>>>you sure are crying though, so much yapping for nothing >>>>>>>For supposedly chill stoners you guys are always having meltdowns. >>>>>>>>...they said, without an ounce of self awareness.

Ironic username (F4SCISTS_GO_HOME) someone trying to police what others do >What's ironic about it? You don't get to drive high, just like you don't get to steal, be a racist, or a p*do. Does that upset you? How unsurprising. >>You do get to smoke meth while pregnant though, right? >>>What a pregnant person does with their body is none of your business. When you drive high and endanger others, that IS everybody's business. 🤦‍♀️ >>>>Lol, you know you’re a joke. At some point you’ll be lying in bed by yourself and the epiphany will come to you. Argue with others, but you know.. >>>>>I'm sorry to hear that about you. Is that why you do drugs? To cope? >>>>>>Just do me a favor, remember me when it happens ;-) >>>>>>>No one will remember you :(

Just simply do not smoke weed. How hard is that? >Then they would have to get some self-control and a real personality. Impossible. >> You don't drink alcohol, or coffee, or buy over the counter meds? It's the same thing those are just deemed ok by government . No other difference.
>>>One of them gets you high. >>>>Caffeine is a psychoactive stimulant, as is marijuana. If a grown adult wants to be stoned in the comfort of their own home, why should they face prison time? You can drink yourself into a coma, tonight, and that's perfectly legal.. but a plant that grows in the ground is evil, or something? Conservatives are crazy.

maybe don't be a drug addict? edit: upset a whole lotta losers with this one >What? So since even the feds are trying to decriminalize weed it's a drug? Because we all k ow its way worse that alcohol. Or in your case based on your post history video games. >>Why do weed smokers always jump to "ALCOHOL IS WORSE" yeah, it is, I never said it wasn't. Two things can be bad at once. >>>So you’d be fine with jail time for beer? >>>>I don't drink I don't care. I think these sentences are wild, but weed is obnoxious, smells like shit, and stoners are always insufferable >>>>>I don’t smoke but I can still see the logical inconsistency >>>>>>I think if they said "beer is outlawed" i'd say "maybe don't be an alcoholic" so the result is the same. Putting things in your body that make you intentionally dumber, without good reason (i.e ACTUAL medical use) is dire and people get blown out when they get reminded they are addicts. People think "oh smoking weed literally every day doesn't mean I have a problem" it's a shitty drug for shitty people, drinking is the same, any class A/schedule I is the same, they're all bad, nobody wants to have that discussion. >>>>>>>You think anyone who drinks beer is an alcoholic? Sugar is also bad. I don’t see anyone arguing for that to be illegal. It’s a weird stance to want the government to step in and control things to this degree.

Tell me you nothing about marijuana without telling me you know nothing about marijuana. >makes you slow, is highly addictive and makes you waste your life? it's a drug for obese lazy people that say it can do no wrong whilist happily ignoring the giant list of terrible cognitive effects it has "yeah but people can use it for pain medication" yeah like 0.1% of users and then the rest are all people on "medical cannabis" for their anxiety >>“Makes you slow, is highly addictive, and makes you waste your life … it’s a drug for obese lazy people” - again, how is that any different from what you suffer due to your sad gaming addiction? >>>You're really projecting this gaming addiction thing, I hope when you decide to stop being a stoner layabout you don't have too rough of a time >>>>I love that you made your profile private afterwards to hide your gamer addiction. Nailed it. >>>>>no I don't want creepy drug addicts on my profile who project their addictions on to me, stay medicated bud >>>>>>Talk about projections! This is too easy.

This is what happens when Republicans run things. >Would like to have seen Biden and his auto pen decriminalize federally since legalizing is apparently more of a liberal idea. Yet here we are. >>Your first mistake was thinking the Democrats aren't conservative. >>>They aren’t. But that’s cute. It’s funny how the crowd who doesn’t even know what libertarian means but that all claim to be one. Also likes to think they know what a democrat or conservative is. Nothing the Dems have been pushing for is conservative. That’s why you don’t see Dems banning weed or health care numb nuts. >>>>They are conservative. They're just not cartoonishly evil like all Republicans. >>>>>We get it. You’re upset that the Democrats are aligning themselves with socialism and it’s a bridge too far for you so you call yourself “conservative”. >>>>>>No idea what that means.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/GODZILLA/comments/1vb4gdl/important_aigenerated_content_is_now_banned/

HIGHLIGHTS

Godzilla would approve >Well i don't >>You can make r/eric and make the rules whatever you want >>>😂 did you not click on it? That's already a real sub with discussions! So he's still SOL. >>>>But there are no AI rules there so he’s good to go

Yeah i suppose it is all about the ease for moderators. Gotta do what you gotta do. But lets be honest if an artist feels threatened by gen ai thats transparent then thats just the artists own insecurity. >I’m not an artist and I’m glad, we need to not use precious resources to make AI slop >>I mean thats your truth of ai art. Doesnt make it the truth. And previous resources are used to make analog art. So ur hate is the only thing showing. Not a real point. When you have an actual soap box to stand on then maybe you can speak. Dont mean ill ever subscribe to hate inspired ideals. >>>I just prefer to drink my water instead of giving it to AI. Nothing is as precious or as important as that and there is no such things as versions of the truth >>>>Everyone has their own ideals which shape their perception of their reality. So yes there are differences in truth. Look at american politics. So anyways instead of channeling that into hate and something that doesnt benefit anyone you could maybe channel it into trying to find sustainable ways for ai to exist and not kill the planet. Or you could just continue complaining. Which everyone loves to hear btw. Just pure hate fueled words always get the most converts. Not. Maybe use your brain for something of substance instead of just spewing the easiest bandwagon truths youve heard. >>>>>That is not truth 😂 >>>>>>Exactly! Im glad youre getting the point your opinions are misguided and arent at all based in reality. >>>>>>>I don’t think you’re based in reality buddy 😂

A shame. >Don’t let the door hit you on the way out, shill. >>Shilling what? I paint for a living. >>>And you STILL like AI art. That’s the REAL shame. >>>>Yeah, I don't get my opinions from Reddit and TikTok, I actually did the hard thing and sought a career in art, learned about it's history and have a clue on how art works. >>>>>i like your art, i saw your spaceg one. actually curious on your opinion. why do u think its a shame to ban ai here based on your art knowledge? >>>>>>Thanks, it means a lot! I also appreciate the question and interest. Well, a simple one is that Avant-garde movements like Minimalism already sought to make art completely devoid of humanity or authorship. Industrial elements, machine made pieces, the removal of as much expression as possible... in that sense, those are not stable grounds to dismiss AI as a potential art form. Art became conceptual, about ideas, executions and concepts, this is how we generally think about art nowadays. In my opinion, a ban on AI is like banning pictures, paintings, sculpture, or anything similar, it's kinda arbitrary. Thus, I believe that if anyone has enough creativity to use any tool to create something that's cool, fun or interesting they should be able to do so. I also don't subscribe to the idea that AI is somehow stealing from me by downloading publicly available pieces anyone has access to and a right to download without any kind of consent.

"GenAI art hurts the work of real artists, is a crediting nightmare, and is generally controversial." Just be honest. Nazi 3 scene from Inglorious Bastards >What does this even mean >>The mods themselves don't view AI art as art and are disrespectful towards anyone that uses AI in their art. That none of their reasons are good faith. I'm not an artist at all, to cut that nonsense off before it starts. But they're obviously wrong despite whatever anyone in this sub says to the contrary. >>>"don’t view AI art as art" Probably because AI art isn’t art? >>>>Look through a thread before replying to someone. Maybe someone has said something similar? If they have all you're doing is adding spam. Follow this and see if there's something to add! Edit: I really hope the mods aren't removing any of the replies I'm getting and hope it's just people blocking me. I want people to see how anti-AI people sound when confronted by a pro. It's been nothing but insults with no counter arguments whatsoever. This seems like the only post where this type of discussion would be appropriate. Update: So far I've seen two common arguments: AI art requires little effort and it's harmful to the environment. Prompts don't write themselves and can take a substantial amount of effort. No one argues environmental harm invalidates other forms of art as art. The marble and other such materials used in things like sculptures didn't dig itself out of the ground. >>>>>Username (CalamityofCringe) checks out >>>>>>See everyone? Nothing but insults. >>>>>>>Why are you advocating so hard for AI when it steals from artists, harms the environment, and is actively harming people? >>>>>>>>I advocate for it because I feel the hatred is completely ridiculous and manufactured. I've seen posts where people complain something they liked turned out to be AI. Hating something you otherwise like because AI created it is silly. "AI when it steals from artists" It genuinely doesn't you just don't understand how training them actually works. "harms the environment" There's plenty of things you do or use throughout the day that do far more harm and isn't really an argument against AI art being art. "and is actively harming people?" We aren't talking about terminators. Companies spend billions on branding, many the jobs related to those sorts of things are "safe". The only people AI genuinely harms are the people that produce low quality content that's worse than AI.

AI cannot do art. Any attempt of it doing so is not art. If you disagree, you're dumb as shit. >The prompts don't write themselves. Literally every criticism you have for AI art was thrown at photography, film, and graphic design. The exact same things get said literally every time a new method of creating art is formed. You're just an idiot that's angry because you've been told to be angry. >>The prompts don't write themselves. If this is your argument, I'd suggest the persons writing prompts just make actual art in being writers. Clearly that's their preferred avenue of expression. >>>Except it's not and you're trying to impose that on them because you don't like their chosen medium. You know the phrase "a picture is worth a thousand words"? AI art is an inversion of that phrase, a thousand (or more) words can now make a picture. >>>>I'd prefer not to live in a world where "art" is little more than a blended Frankenstein's monster of existing real art grafted to another piece without prior consent of the true genius behind it (the artists AI steals from). >>>>>Do you have any idea how much art is inspired by or done in the style of another artist? >>>>>>Sure, but that's not what you're advocating for in the slightest and we both know it.

(ctnd) Yes, AI art is trained in the style of others. Obviously there's low effort AI art, just like low effort "real" art, but there's also going to be high effort pieces too. >There's where you've lost the plot. The training method is layering actual images into one another to construct an aberrant thing which simulates real art. >>Yes, that's how it's trained so the AI model can "recognize" what it's "seeing" and say "oh that's... By..." so that's it can do something in the style of that artist. The original pieces aren't even typically stored after the training. >>>What a very strange defense. So in an effort to make a mockery of real art AI training isn't retaining say...the writing of prolific authors in cloud storage for later use? It isn't scraping images from sources like DeviantArt etc. for the access of future prompters? Yeah, I call bullshit. >>>>Oh they absolutely get trained off of stuff like that too. So? You don't take inspiration from stuff like that as well? Are you stealing? Obviously a 1:1 recreation of something would be plagiarism, no one is arguing otherwise. It's up to the artist to make the piece transformative and something new. >>>>>Alas, you're just not getting it. Prompters are not real artists. What they do on a fundamental level is repackaged plagiarism. There's nothing transformative about what they do because nothing has been added which is their own creation. >>>>>>Yes, there's lazy people that type "make sonic do X" and it quickly becomes derivative. But there's also AI art being used to create massively complex multimillion dollar blockbuster movies. Are movies not art? Do you really think those movies aren't transformative with the material they were trained on or are you just mad?

Ehh, I feel neutral on it. Those who draw by hand and are incredible artist should be spotlighted and have their work acknowledged without feeling like they're competing against AI generated art. On the other hand, there are a lot of artist who do use it, to get a visual on an idea they want to draw. Same with those who use it for general workplace tasks and to reduce spending time on repetitive tasks. They also take the output and create art more to their liking afterwards. Yes, some folks generate art by AI then present it as their own, but even that can get muddled. I won't argue against the new rules but I think there's room for the 2 sides to exist without brining the hammer down on one or the other. >"On the other hand, there are a lot of artist who do use it, to get a visual on an idea they want to draw." Eh, do they, though? Cause I sure don't. None of the other artists I know do. >>You don't speak for all artist world wide and I'm not even saying it's everyone, but many do. >>>"You don't speak for all artist world wide" No, if you go back and re-read the post you're replying to, I speak for myself and those I know. Now, what qualifies you to speak for all artists worldwide? >>>>I don't, that's why I said many do without attaching a number to it, or using my friends and acquaintances as examples. Also the point of me saying I'm neutral because I understand the nuances around it without being reactive and screaming "fck AI slop" >>>>>"I don't, that's why I said many do without attaching a number to it, or using my friends and acquaintances as examples." So, you admit you're basing this claim on nothing. It's from the Department of Posterior Information Extraction. You claim you're neutral, but then you characterize people who dislike AI as being "reactive" and "screaming". >>>>>>Because the responses I received came in swinging as if I said I was in favor of it. Reactionary, no? And if you want examples, I'm going off of the artist I follow on IG and those who have taken to YouTube (either comment section or video) to talk about AI art and their own usage of it while still being talented artist. They also have views on 3D printing and selling items at cons. That said, there's a comment right above that says fck AI and those who feel neutral on it, in response to me.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/1va68bj/anthony_fauci_invoked_his_fifth_amendment_right/

HIGHLIGHTS

Things innocent people do… >Exactly. The 5th amendment is there to protect innocent people. That is the entire reason it is in the constitution. >>I wish I was ignorant enough to trust Pfizer and all the other billion dollar pharma companies. Must be nice. >>>Great whataboutism on a question about the fifth amendment - which explicitly exists to protect innocent people. >>>>Nah. I’m don’t simp for corporations. I do pray you never miss a safe and effective COVID booster. >>>>>Have had Covid boosters every year, not sure what that has to do with the fifth amendment being designed to protect innocent people though. >>>>>>How many times have you had covid? And why does he need protection? He already has a pardon for a crime he didn’t commit >>>>>>>Haven't had Covid a single time, but i am not sure what that has to do with the fifth amendment being put into the constitution to protect innocent people.

Fauci should be held accountable. He knowingly misled Americans. Lied and pursued his own fame and best interest (he admitted this in his own diaries). >"Lied and pursued his own fame and best interest " It is absolutely hilarious watching MAGA try to claim Fauci should go to jail because it says in his diaries he appreciated the praise, when in those same diaries Fauci says Trump was a narcissistic idiot who wanted non-stop press conferences and attention and Fauci had to beg him to let them just do their jobs. Doctors saved lives, the child rapist con man lied to you. Please stop believing the MAGA grifters when they tell you that doctors are to blame for decisions and policies that those same MAGA politicians actually were in charge of. >>I’m not maga and never voted for Trump, >>>Then stop blindly trusting MAGA when they feed you bullshit. Are you not paying any attention to the fact that these hearings, these claims, are all just MAGA political propaganda? There's no scientific body or experts anywhere in agreement with this nonsense. There's plenty of criticism in retrospect of what we could have done differently, but nothing to justify criminal charges, fraud, or anything they're trying to blame on Fauci while ignoring that Trump was President and responsible for the government. >>>>Stop blindly trusting fauci. We all know many of his claims were false. Covid came from a lab. He knew it and he crushed any dissent or honest dialogue about this and many other things that you took as truth. We should not have shut down schools for 15 months. These were terrible decisions. I still see people outdoors with masks. Ridiculous >>>>>Please, please, before you die: Try to learn and grow as a human being. It'd be a terrible shame if your mind stagnated on believing the worst and stupidest people in the world because they fed you conspiracies on social media, rather than trying to grow and understand what educated people and scientists have to say with evidence and data.

So sad seeing them so triggered in /r/conservative unironically calling him guilty and shit for doing this >Ok but when a conservative does this, they're guilty? Fuck Trump, fuck his goonies, and fuck whoever uses the same tactics as them to get out of shit. Have some consistency and some dignity >>Why are you putting words in my mouth? >>>You're literally putting words in a subreddits mouth. Christ >>>>No, they are literally saying that. >>>>>And so are you. Work on that self awareness bud. Reddit has enough morons >>>>>>What are you talking about? I’m literally saying what? Project much? >>>>>>>If you're not going to respond to what I'm commenting it ironically sort of just goes to prove the bigger point that you're being a hypocrite. >>>>>>>>I am responding to you, what the fuck are you talking about? Im not putting any words in anyone’s mouth. All I said was what I saw them saying on the sub. I made no comment about a conservative pleading the 5th, hence you putting words in my mouth.

This guy literally murders puppies and the democrats couldn’t love him more. Sick. Very sick people. >This guy literally saved at least 26 million lives with his research in aids, and literally millions more with his covid vaccine work. Meanwhile republicans, trump and elon and friends, cut pre-approved pre-funded usaid which has already resulted in the deaths of 700,000 people, mostly children. Gross, disgusting hypocritical people that demonstrably don't care about human life. >>Fauci lied about aids too and said that everyone was going to get it thus leading to widespread mistreatment and resentment of people infected with hiv. Imagine how much harder there lives were made because of this man. How many people have died due to the covid vaccine? How many people who died of Covid could have been saved if they didn’t censor people and push a propaganda campaign that dismissed proven sars treatments? How much money did he make pumping the jab? Don’t pretend to have ethics or have the moral high ground you people are evil and only use that as a method for controlling people who actually have a conscious. >>>I hear you bud, you're very emotional and conspiratorial about it all. I'm more rational and care more about facts and reality, so at least I'm happy we can both agree and concede that fauci saved many millions of lives with his work with aids and covid. I also appreciate your concession about republicans and maga making decisions that lead to the preventable deaths of 700,000 people, mostly children, so far this year alone. >>>>I concede nothing to you because your propaganda and cnn talking points do not deserve a response. Fauci has lead to more suffering and did nothing to reduce the numbers who died from aids or covid. >>>>>You've been duped into believing nonsense innit >>>>>>The hardest thing to do is convince an idiot that they’re an idiot. You’re just not worth the investment.

Fauci was already pardoned by Biden/autopen. He can't incriminate himself more than he already has and invoking the 5th amendment does nothing except prove people right. Edit: even the diehard Fauci supporters are having trouble defending him recently. >He can be charged with perjury, which is the purpose of the hearing. What crime - exactly - do you think Fauci committed? >>"What crime - exactly - do you think Fauci committed?" Lying about Covid 19 and the origins of Covid 19. It's not a crime anymore, since Biden/autopen pardoned him for that crime. >>>Can you provide any evidence that he lied "about COVID-19" (not sure what this even means - do you think it didn't exist or something?) or its origins? >>>>Lying about something does not mean denying it exists. I am sorry if you can't tell the difference between the two. For example: I lied about baseball when I said a homerun is worth 10 runs. I did not deny the existence of baseball in that statement. Fauci lied about the best way of dealing with Covid with the lockdowns and the deadliness of Covid. He forced the creation of policies that were more detrimental to people. He lied that Covid started naturally. He lied about not funding gain of function research. I hope you have a good day and please do some research. >>>>>I never said lying means you deny the existence of, I said you didn't clear state what he lied about, so I asked if you thought he lied about it's existence. I'm sorry your statements weren't clear, next time make them more clear and I won't have to ask. What specific lies did Fauci state about either lockdowns or the deadliness of COVID-19? Show your evidence they were actually lies. State what policies Fauci created, and show your evidence that they hurt more people than they helped. COVID-19 is a disease and is absolutely a natural result. You are actually trying to argue that SARS-CoV-2 is not natural, and the evidence for this is fleeting at best. There's 0 evidence of any gain of function research that lead to SARS-CoV-2. Before you tell others to do research, please learn the difference between COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2. >>>>>>I was clear in what I said. Do some research on your own instead of only listening to the mainstream media and Fauci lying to you. >>>>>>>Oh, don't worry, I've actually looked at a lot of papers on this. They disagree with you. I was presenting you with a chance to show your own evidence that what I've read is wrong. But it appears that you don't have any, and whatever you have read didn't really teach you difference between COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2, so it probably wasn't reputable to begin with. I'd recommend doing research from actual reputable sources. You'll quickly find that qualified scientists think a lot of what you're saying is nonsense pseudo-science BS.

Rand is Big Mad that Dr. Fauci is a real doctor with real accreditation (not self-accreditation), and Rand isn't. Edit: I see a lot of babies are having trouble with reading comprehension and skipped over "WITH REAL ACCREDITATION" entirely. Rand Paul invented his own accreditation agency. Go look it up. >TIL graduating from Duke with an MD makes you not a real doctor. >>Board certified in the organization you head is why It's not a recognized board certification >>>You don't lose your MD if you let your certification go. >>>>True but to say your a doctor without practicing medicine which requires a board certification puts you on Dr. Phil levels of doctor >>>>>No it really doesn't. If you retire should you ask people to stop referring to you as doctor because you're no longer practicing? Rand Paul is a real doctor with a real MD, and he always will be whether he's practicing or not. >>>>>>Ross Geller is also a real doctor too! >>>>>>>Here is a good one. Is Jill Biden a doctor?

why would a scientist need to invoke the fifth? >Why would a business man? >>i guess if their goal was to protect themselves from further prosecution? is that what he is doing? >>>Is that what Trump was doing when the did it more than 400 times? >>>>I have no idea, I have never spoken to President Trump. I personally always find it suspect when someone pleads the fifth, no matter who they are. What about you? >>>>>then you've never watched or seen the text transcripts of Trump's own testimony? he's lied and claimed the 5th hundreds of times. as is anyone's constitutional right. it's not suspect when you have someone trying to prosecute you. it's "innocent until proven guilty" and you're absolutely not required to incriminate yourself. it's a common trick that cops and prosecutors will use (the law actually allows them to LIE to you about anything) to get you to say something they can use against you. know your miranda rights, especially the "anything you say CAN and WILL be used AGAINST you". a closed mouth helps you stay out of jail. >>>>>>fair enough. It makes me lean towards thinking someone is guilty when they plead the fifth personally. certainly not illegal or not allowed

Don't use quotes in the title if you're not going to actually quote exactly what was said. It's misleading. You can also use proper grammar that you hopefully learned in English class to adjust your quotes to reflect exactly what was said. Much respect to Fauci >Assuming everyone is a native speaker on a global site. Peak American. >>Even my relatives in non English speaking countries know that quotes represent what was actually stated and that they’re not meant to be paraphrased summaries. This isn’t a matter of if someone is a native speaker or not. It’s a sadly common issue in primary English speaking countries. >>>Obviously not the part of the comment I was referencing >>>>Yes, so obvious. >>>>>[removed] >>>>>>Maybe you should go outside for a bit eh? >>>>>>>Well that’s obviously not true.

So either COVID escaped from a weapons biolab and it was a cover up or COVID was a big nothingburger and nothing should have been shut down. What is it, conservatives? >Number 1 Edit: I ain't republican >>There's just zero evidence to support the conspiracy, no scientific experts agree it's true, and at best people can say "well we can't be 100% certain it didn't." >>>I know I know. I may sound like some nutty conspiracy theorist. In actuality, I am just highly skeptical of governments and coverups. ie. Kennedy, MLK, to Epstein. I understand that it may never be disclosed or made known to the public, at least in our lifetime, the origin and cause of the outbreak. But... China had a real problem going on at that time. Millions marching in Hong Kong for independence. It had been going on for months. Then all of a sudden, no more socializing in public. Must be indoors. No more than, however many people, allowed together at a time... But, sure it could be coincidence. I really don't know. Hope that we as a society can come together someday to overcome our differences and thrive. >>>>I am going to go out on a limb but... Biological Weapons are Stupid. Imagine something less effective than a gun that you cannot control. The Chinese are not morons. So to recap. The Chinese released a bioweapon to have an excuse to stop socialisation in public and do extremely unpopular things like lockdowns. Mate. I sat up with the dying. I contributed to research that saved lives. Like "you are part of the government". Yeah. I am a doctor. We didn't like the Conservative government at the time that actively spent a decade calling us greedy and lazy and we STILL showed up during Covid. I don't think people realise how close we came to catastrophe. >>>>>The United States dropped not one, but two nukes, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, killed millions for power. Yes, it is a farfetched idea. But humans have done some fucked up shit. I was not directly affected by COVID. No one in my circle was killed by it. I may not understand the ramifications it may have caused. Could be said that no one could have predicted the outcome of the pandemic, whether purposeful or not. It is people like you who society owes continued prosperity. So thanks for showing up. I never want to confuse the fact that me having doubts about the story behind COVID with the notion that it was a hoax. It happened. People were affected. People died. And some people took advantage and came out on the other side very very wealthy >>>>>>I am personally not affected by gun violence, ergo bullets are harmless. Also why be so clever to invent a lethal disease that's defeated by a drug that costs £3 a box and is produced by the tonne.

Cool, I guess I have mixed feelings about Fauci now. Anyways, what's going on with the Epstein files? >Nah, this is an American right and every single American should use them to their fullest. Just because you are innocent doesn't mean you should say anything. It's like dealing with cops. Just shut the fuck up. You don't say shit to cops other than what is legally required. >>I posted this separately, but I don’t really understand how the 5th amendment applies to him here. He was pardoned by Biden, correct? If there is no chance of being criminally prosecuted, the 5th amendment doesn’t apply because there is no chance of criminal prosecution. Couldn’t he be opening himself up to contempt if he refuses to provide testimony? https://www.findlaw.com/criminal/criminal-rights/fifth-amendment-right-against-self-incrimination.html Edit: I’m wrong. The pardon was for between 2014-25. Today’s testimony would just set him up for some BS charges regardless of what he says. >>>Here's the thing. I'm not a lawyer. I can't presume to argue that with any legal basis so take this at random internet poster value. The Supreme Court ruled in the late 1800s that if you receive a pardon for something you can't invoke the 5th because you can't be charged. Federally. Whose to say what states wouldn't try to criminally charge him? >>>>I just edited my comment. The pardon covers him between 2014-25. Anything he said today would be used to make something up criminally for today’s proceedings. Smart to just plea the 5th and keep his mouth closed.

I wont defend fauci for the things he did mismanage, especially if he really did squash the reports that was was a bio research leak or worse, bio weapon leak. Changes 100% how we respond to those responsible. So republicans can go after fauci, I just dont want to hear crap when eric and don jr, kushner and all their cronies are in the hot seat too. >The thing is, there is no evidence that it was tweaked or leaked by a lab. The thought that China would create something and literally decide to leak it on their own population first doesn’t pass the sniff test. >>My friend, I’d like to point you to the thousands of years of Chinese history that says otherwise. Not that I condone what’s happening to Fauci here, but to say that scenario doesn’t pass the sniff test is grossly ignorant to nearly all of actual history and the plight of the Chinese underneath their dynastic rulers. >>>The United States has literally tested small pox and syphilis on unsuspecting citizens and you don’t have to go back hundreds or thousands of years. Currently we’re giving Monsanto a pass. >>>>Yes and your argument is called whataboutism and ironically strengthens the case for that it was an (unintentional) lab leak possibly based on GoF research. I think there is far more important political court cases to pursue at the moment, but that is not the point of this thread. >>>>>He's pointing out that the logic of "China would do this complete irrational thing because they have a history of it" makes zero damn sense. Abusing your subjects is not unique to China, and that doesn't create a reason to unleash a bioweapon on your own population. The most important part is there's still just absolutely zero evidence of it happening, even when that evidence should exist. No doctors and experts examining COVID have found any trace of modification and gain of function being conducted on the virus that exists. It's entirely speculated, and every MAGA moron trying to blame Fauci for it and a cover up, keeps having to ignore that the Trump administration was in charge for this and should have the records and proof if it were true.