mfed1122

Yeah this is exactly what turned me off from it when I looked into it. I kind of like that it would lend a more physical-space quality to it, but ultimately I'm hardly ever online, so it would just be me being totally out of the loop all the time without a bouncer. I know I could figure out how to do it, but it's a lot of effort for something where I'm not even sure I'll like what it gives me.

I totally agree, but I think they could have managed to capture the simple nuance of "in order to care about people and make their lives better, we make a special exception for evil assholes, and we do not care about those people or make their lives better". If I live on an island with ten people and one of them only wants to beat up the others all the time, there's not really much hypocrisy in me saying "I want to make everyone's lives better, but this one jerk won't let us have that, so I guess we have to settle for making everyone's life better except for his". Nothing stops the Democrats from knocking it off with the warmongering while still at least speaking harsh words about the true failings of their political opponents.

Nice strawman, but I'm not saying he's a pussy for feeling bad for cursing. I'm saying, let me be very clear:

1. The worst in him is apparently calling for Democrats to bully Republicans, which is a silly level of worst to apologize for on account of the fact that:

2: The people he's calling to bully are fascist, homophobic, xenophobic, racist, corrupt, evil powerful people who are currently dismantling the country

3: It's ridiculous to say "I should have been nicer" when obviously they didn't lose because they were mean, and if anything being more mean would have helped them, or at least...

4: Being more mean maybe would at least have driven more people to take aggressive action that may have prevented the current situation

It's just ridiculous for someone who was 20x nicer than the victorious competition to say they should have been even more nicerer on top of that. Why? What good would it have done? Would you rather your mom be kind to a criminal trying to rob her, or hateful? (See how uncool and ineffective that is to try to drag your mom into things?)

So if I didn't make it clear enough. I'm not looking down on anyone for "having a conscience". I think Walz doesn't have enough of a conscience to bolster himself to do what needs to be done and overcome the paradox of tolerance and hate the opposition enough to make himself a strong opponent rather than a polite little pushover.

Adventure Time lore type comic

I've always thought of competence porn as something more like Suits or House M.D, where the entire point is to see cool smart people doing call smart things and vicariously feel cool and smart yourself by watching them do it. In Star Trek, the crew's competence seems incidental, but at least to me it doesn't feel like the point of the episodes is to show off how competent people are - it usually seems like either some sort of philosophical enquiry, a straightforward action/suspense, interpersonal drama, or some combination of them. So while competence does feature in the stories, I feel like it's handled with a lot more depth and realism than straight up pornography of competence. Star Trek is like competence erotica~

I really wish this just said life before the internet.

Zooming in on tiny drops and saying XYZ PLUMMETS is my #1 pet peeve of all stock analysis

Absolutely there is, but unfortunately the solution to CP is having moderators who can delete content, and that alone is enough to cause all the problems with moderators. It seems largely intractable to me. The only thing I could see maybe working is some system where moderators can be removed by community vote, but then you rely on systems preventing fake accounts from being created or account age to stop those votes from being botted, etc... I just don't see how to technically solve the problem of moderators having power to delete things. It's the classic issue of who watches the watchmen. Humanity has never had a great solution to this.

The problem is that if you actually have no or insufficient moderation then people just start using the site to post child pornography. And then you visiting what used to be a site you like becomes basically illegal and dangerous, not to mention potentially traumatizing. I'm not exaggerating, there was a small game fan forum site I used to love along with many others, but someone caught on to the fact it was run by just one guy and kept signing up with fake accounts and posting child porn or links to it. Luckily I had already fallen off using the site by then, but one of my Internet friends who still visited it kept me updated on the drama. First everyone normal stopped visiting. Then it eventually got so bad the owner had to shut down the site.

People lack imagination when it comes to what will happen with no moderation. It quickly becomes horrible.

Big insult chains like that only hit home for me if each one adds a new dimension or sense to the insult. This is just saying stupid stupid stupid stupid stupid stupid stupid stupid stupid over and over again. Reminds me of le epic reddit insults like "fuckwaffle" or whatever the hell it was. I hate conservatives and fascism as much as anyone, but it's tiring to see such circlejerky posts that basically just say "conservatives dumb, upvote below". I don't need my opinion circlejerked, I'm already convinced of it without some random man telling me it's true. And there's nothing cathartic about reading this either because of how try-hard the insult sounds. Bleh.

All these AI doing X things out of context of the prompt are super misleading. Obligatory, I hate Musk and Grok. But spreading misinformation and half-truths is, and I can't believe I have to say this, bad even if it aligns with your beliefs.

MechaHitler has mecha in it, which of course makes it more appropriate to be chosen in some sense. You could rerun even the same prompt and likely get different answers. It's totally meaningless. And don't let the battleground of whether Musk is a Nazi or not shift to whether Grok says Nazi shit or not. That's a stupid battleground with lots of ambiguity. The existing battleground of Nazi shit that Musk directly says and does is enough. It's a stronger ground to stand on for that position. Desperately trying to append even the weakest evidence to your position just gives you more weak points that the other side can use to make you look stupid and ridiculous. Stick to the strong points, we eat too good with Musk's direct behavior to stoop to nibbling up scraps like this.