Yeah fingers crossed. I'm rather hopeful it won't. That would really suck.
For all my sarcasm around what the war will be referred to in the history books, I'm hoping it will be a footnote in history and not one of the future's biggest Wikipedia pages like the last one was.
I think Tay will be taught in AI ethics-type courses for generations to come.
I wonder whether it'll be in the context of "hey look what happened when AI had no guardrails", or whether it will be "fuck we should have seen this coming".
As horrendous as the content it was spouting was, it was highly amusing to see the project nosedive so spectacularly quickly.
In fact, the "Ukraine war" title doesn't really do it justice then does it.
Maybe they should rebrand it, call it a different War, maybe something that reflects the whole World that gets involved. If there's been a couple before, just stick a number 3 on the end. Sorted.
Isn't that basically Cyprus?
My Cypriot history is severely lacking here.
I agree - there's some large accesibility-like issues with communication, which causes issues for people where it isn't their first language, the neurodiverse, or in safety critical applications. The /s is a fine early example of that.
That said, if everyone stuck to basic facts and focussed on clarity rather than content, the world would be a mega boring place.
What they mean does not matter.
Nearly every internet comment section for the last thirty years summed up in one line.
Hi American friend!
I absolutely get it - "too good to be true" is definitely a thing in the English speaking world.
I absolutely get the apprehension - if I was jumping on to a Bee Bus or the Edinburgh Trams with a ticket that some rando was trying to offload, then my Spidey senses would be tingling too.
In this instance though, we're probably looking at a value of US$10ish, so in my own perfectly subjective opinion, I'd be happy to give it a bash. If it doesnt work, the the ticket gets yeeted and the contactless card gets used instead.
I absolutely understand settling in to the "normal" of buying your own ticket though and I really appreciate you taking the time to share your experience.
A great question. I was going to call it a "thought experiment", but as Wikipedia more succinctly calls it, a "philosophical concept". I'm wary of jumping to the paradox of tolerance as a device to handwave away violence against anyone.
It's an important point to consider and it raises vital questions that challenges my own argument, but ultimately the rights of the human override any philosophical ideals.
In this instance, I would much rather preserve the rights of any person - arsehole or not - rather than subject them to sexual violence because of a perceived difference in political opinion.
Thanks for your reply, I appreciate your insight.
We still disagree, but I genuinely appreciate the additional context you have to offer. I'm not wholly altruistic, I think Fuentes is a massive piece of human garbage.
But, he is human - and with that, is his right to human rights.
I don't like him as much as the next person and that is an entirely subjective opinion, but levelling the same kind of hatred and lack of compassion effectively makes you no better than fanny balls Fuentes is. It's a dangerously small leap from <I don't like what this person stands for> and therefore sanctioning sexual assault, to <they don't like what I stand for> and therefore sanctioning sexual assault.
I suspect we're on the same broad page, but our means are vastly different.
You and I are on such vastly different platforms that you're one of the few people I don't think I can find any common ground with. Whereas I agree one's own qualified rights end where others rights begin, I consider basic human rights to be absolute, and certainly not influenced by whatever political views you do or don't share.
By extension, the abstracted opinion of "I think it's funny that <a group of people I don't like> " is borderline fascism in itself, and your position is cancerous to any anti-fascist movement you're involved in.
It's whatever floats your boat at the end of the day. I've seen people with unique usernames being super chill in one community, and then appear in another spouting off like they're two steps away from annexing Poland in another. It's wild.
I do my absolute best not to block people or communities though. I worry that my account will just end up as an echo chamber for whatever I'm interested in, and I'll just end up disconnected from the Real World™️, as tempting as it sounds sometimes.
Sometimes seeing and hearing shit that wasn't top of your agenda keeps you grounded - but it's an entirely subjective view.
e: community clarity.
The first time round, Gatlandball was revolutionary and not many teams had the strategies to counter it. It was brilliant, the players were decent, and there was a swell in Welsh rugby that felt like every game was a RWC final.
Problem is, the world's gotten wise to Gatland's tricks now, and whereas he's still an undeniably great coach, the tactics are oldskool, the players are great but uninspiring, and the Millennium Stadium was deathly quiet - even the anthem wasn't particularly loud.
I personally think Gats should go, but then the next question is substantially tougher - who next?