I’ll ask again because you dodged the important question - Does Palestine have the right to defend itself like Israel and what would that look like to you?

Which specific 2 state solutions are you referring to? I assume it’s the ~1994 deal that collapsed because Israel couldn’t stop their terrorism and assassinations throughout the negotiations, and the Partition Plan that violated the UN charter with respect to national self-determination and carved out the majority of the territory to the minority Israeli population.

To defend the genocide of Palestine as a necessary lesson reveals a let’s say… interesting moral framework - particularly as Israel escalates aggression against Iran and Lebanon. Putting aside the obvious genocidal intent, rhetoric, and action, how does an exterminated population learn any lesson?

Your argument is the best possible case one could make for the genocide of Israel - they are the regional threat and aggressor - they are the ones that (by your sickening logic) need to be exterminated to teach them a lesspn. The outcomes of the actions you’re defending have civilisation-ending consequences one way or another, and zero benefit - why do you hold these positions?

Cancel culture strikes again… From the right as usual.

Palestinians killed in Gaza aren’t terrorists - they’re the victims of a genocide.

Since October 7th, 44,000 Palestinians have been killed compared to 1,706 Israelis. The stats over the past few decades don’t deviate much from this ratio. Israel is killing many times more Palestinians, and a higher ratio of children, they’re seizing land, holding many times more hostages, and committing and proudly documenting countless warcrimes.

Does Palestine have the right to defend itself like Israel? What would that look like to you? I ask mostly because you’re actively supporting an ongoing genocide while blaming the victims of that genocide while applying inconsistent, nonsensical standards across the two groups.

As an alternative, you could try self-hosting searxng if you’re that way inclined.

The important follow-up is to rinse/repeat. This doesn’t stop until the wealth redistribution does, and we regress to corporate town serfdom.

The people that vote for this want their elected government to be so small they’ll be ruled by corporate overlords solely interested in extracting their wealth.

For anyone that couldn’t bother reading the above comment, I’ve given a summary…

hurrrrr I’m incapable of engaging the point people are making.

The cartoon plays with the emotions like the ai image, but the important difference is that people won’t mistake the cartoon for documentation of something that happened.

The cartoon is a fairy tale, that AI image is a lie - the distinction is important.

Pissing away 40bn - 15% of your net worth to own the libs by destroying a company you were forced to buy requires an incredible degree of stupidity. Imagine the damage a remotely competent malicious narcissist could do with that kind of money.

For context, the 2016 election cost $6.5bn - for both sides, presidential and congressional elections - that comfortably buys you a quarter century of elections - and if the GOP has power for that long, at this point, there won’t be another election to fund.

Musk clearly has sub-normal IQ - there’s no shame in that, but he has no shortage of other reasons to be ashamed of himself.

Never attribute to malice what can reasonably be attributed to the stupidity, hate, and pig-headedness of an exceptionally fragile billionaire.

The issue is all signs point to them pivoting to AI and ad driven nonsense - they’ll move on, but if the product goes to shit so will I. The rest is noise.

Because the genocide is the point.

Israeli leadership have admitted to funding Hamas’ displacement of the secular moderates with predictable results - the only credible explanation for this is that it was to manufacture the pretext for their current actions.

#justautocraticfascistethnostatethings

There’s self-hosted LLMs, (e.g. Ollama), but for the purposes of this conversation, yeah - they’re centrally hosted, compute intensive software services.

Unlike regular piracy, accessing “their” product hosted on their servers using their power and compute is pretty clearly theft. Morally correct theft that I wholeheartedly support, but theft nonetheless.

Yeah - that’s all part of the “unless enough people leave” point.

It really depends on the market though - if it’s not an essential good, it doesn’t need to be replaced (online games). If there’s adequate competition, there’s largely undifferentiated alternatives (utilities around me)… and if not, you probably don’t have a choice (your local government services, monopolies, and shallow markets for essential goods).

Unless they hate it enough to ditch a business or service in great enough numbers that it costs the business more money than they save by outsourcing to a computer, people had better get used to it.

What’s hard to understand is why you skipped the question I asked, and answered a different one instead.

The creation of the CSAM is unquestionably far more harmful, but I wasn’t talking about the *creation *- I was talking about the possession. The harm of the creation is already done, and whether or not the material exists after that does nothing to undo that harm.

Again, is your prescription the same as it relates to the possession, not generation of CSAM?

Strange of you to respond to a comment about the fakes being shared in this way…

Do you have the same prescriptions in relation to someone with a stash of CSAM, and if not, why not?

The internet made photos of trump and putin kissing shirtless.

And is that OK?

I’m going to jump in on this one and say yes - it’s mostly fine.

I look at these things through the lens of the harm they do and the benefits they deliver - consequentialism and act utilitarianism.

The benefits are artistic, comedic and political.

The “harm” is that Putin and or Trump might feel bad, maaaaaaybe enough that they’d kill themselves. All that gets put back up under benefits as far as I’m concerned - they’re both extremely powerful monsters that have done and will continue to do incredible harm.

The real harm is that such works risk normalising this treatment of regular folk, which is genuinely harmful. I think that’s unlikely, but it’s impossible to rule out.

Similarly, the dissemination of the kinds of AI fakes under discussion is a negative because they do serious,measurable harm.

Why would anyone want the cybertruck? Yet at present, it’ll take them over a year to clear their backlog.

Some people are just dumb - that applies doubly for those that love Musk because he speaks the Nazi conspiracism Truth™.

The whole tablet UI switching had huge potential - particularly for 2-in-ones and to a lesser extent, mobile devices, but Microsoft absolutely butchered it in its infancy with atrocious execution, and by having the hubris to hobble their primary use-case (desktop) for the sake of pushing their half-baked nonsense into the mobile market. Users didn’t do themselves any favours by not understanding that you could just hit start then type the first couple of letters of what you want to launch (what kind of website double-clicking weirdo clicks through the whole start menu without pinned links or search anyway?).

To me, it all reeks of designers/PMs/devs putting forward a super-promising concept, which was ruined by a bunch of overpaid MBA dipshits that thought they knew better.