this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
854 points (93.9% liked)

Comic Strips

12945 readers
3832 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Certainly. Thank you for your patience, and for the opportunity for discussion.

I respectfully and summarily reject the underlying premise of what you were saying. Your comment did not consider that you are the person best capable of providing your own "protection".

I submit that the regulatory environment needs to recognize and respect that fact.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world -1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

What are you waiting for? I have responded twice before this comment. Your comment is premised on a false dichotomy. When we eliminate that premise, the remainder of your comment doesn't make much sense.

One route forward: You could support your position on a different premise. Another route: You could abandon your previous position and adopt a new one. I eagerly await your choice.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world -3 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Nice try, let me turn on my Rivalarrival translator: Ah yes, it is coming in clear now. You did not like what I said but you have no rebuttal so you hyper focused on one thing. You invented a false premise and remembered to project that like any good bullshitter.

Still waiting.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I'm sorry you feel that way, but none of what you're saying in any way addresses my point: your argument is fundamentally based on the aforementioned false dichotomy. You are the most reliable protector of you. Nobody has a greater motivation to protect you than you. Regulation should recognize that fact.

I understand it may seem like I am "hyper focused" on this rebuttal to your argument, but that is only because you have asked for further response, without actually addressing my initial argument. You've presented no new arguments for me to consider.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 0 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Most reliable protector? What kind of word salad AI bullshit are you trying to feed me.

Still waiting.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I utilized conjugations of your own words:

You are seriously arguing that the corruption in our police system means there is no protection? This is objectively false.I would trust an officer over Ultragagginggunnut any day of the week.

(Emphasis mine)

You identified two possible "protectors". Your argument failed to consider yourself as a third option. That oversight is a fundamental flaw in your initial argument.

You are not a "prisoner". You are the person in the best position to protect you. That fact is not represented in your initial argument.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 0 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I think we are done here. You are clearly just generating AI garbage.

Not waiting anymore.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

It's been a pleasure. My hope is that in future arguments, you will remember your own agency and empowerment.