Doubting it just to be contratian or doubting it because you can point out a flaw in something I said?
There’s a difference. If you’re just gonna troll, then you’re the exact cause of the loss of discourse. It’s up to you.
You should doubt everything you hear. Pull it apart and see if the pieces themselves make any sense. Examine the logic and look for flaws in it that make the conclusion invalid. Ask questions.
You SHOULD doubt me, absolutely. Hold everything up to the light. A very important question to ask is “why am I being told this? Who’s interests is served by telling me this?” Examine every piece.
For example, in the article, notice how everything is “seemingly” “implied” or “appears to”. Those aren’t definitive words. Those are gossip words. No concrete claim is actually made. Just the appearance of one. The sources are just other random Twitter comments speculating.
“It’s probably not true, but you know, it COULD be true”.
That’s exactly how they get you. Then the next time you see a story like this, all you think is “yeah, haven’t I heard something like this before?” and confirm the new BS you’re being fed.
This instance isn’t true. This is someone manipulating you. Like, the manipulation you’re afraid of? It’s right here.
And now you have to wonder, who gains from making you believe this one is real? I’ll leave that one up to you. But in the words of George Carlin: “It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it”.
Sorry you’re being downvotted by the misinformed. It’s not even in the format for ChatGPT, especially the part about being out of tokens. It’s been pointed out already that that is psuedo-code, not actual code. It’s meant to look like something ChatGPT would say.
It’s a troll/ragebait account.
This isn’t news. At all. This is basically reporting on “the hacker known as 4Chan”.
Yeah, we’re all talking about what unhinged dicks they are and wishing for them to be disbanded. Great job!
Except this doesn’t make me care about oil one damn bit. What I do care about it harsh penalties for the perpetrators(including community service and paying for the damage to be undone) and protecting heritage sites like this from other shitty humans. Its not activism, it’s vandalism. It has nothing to do with oil. It would be the same as setting the Mona Lisa on fire and screaming about oil. It’s just unhinged.
how physics works doesn’t necessarily dis prove the existence of a supreme being that designed the laws of physics
This is how Darwin felt about evolution. It was the answer to “how?”, not “why?”.
Thanks. Figured it was a mistake.
This just links to a picture?
You realize many guns can be made full auto just by filling down or replacing a single part and the spring, right? It’s been an issue for DECADES. This law was just reactionary legislation and didn’t actually impact mass shootings. It being gone doesn’t really change anything other than one less law to enforce.
Does America have a gun problem? Yes. Does it have an ass backwards bureaucracy problem? Also yes.
Dude… how fucking high are you?!?
That is some A+ delusional ranting. Or was that /s too somehow?
Honestly, I feel like being a Luddite and everytime someone shows art from now on, critique the ever loving hell out of their process.
“Did you make the brushes yourself from sheep you raised? Did you grind the pigments from plants you grew yourself?”
Art is amazing, but artists are some of the most delicate people. Their entire career is, in a way, a showcase of themselves, and if you take any part of that away from them or judge it, they become incredibly hostile and take it deeply personally. But literally the same kind of criticisms they’re making now are taught in art history about previous advancements. It’s just the same fragile egos afraid that they’re not as special anymore.
Because we’re being wise enough to question if this might have unintended consequences. For example, it might just shift the problem elsewhere and cause more severe draughts for someone else. Just a hypothetical to point out why people might not be immediately onboard with this.
Tho, fun fact, California has been doing this kind of stuff since at least the 60’s. It’s called cloud seeding and we’ve had numerous programs running. They just never got much attention. But technically, the chem trails conspiracy is based in a bit of truth. It’s just not every airplane, but it’s happening. A quick Google search will give you tons of government pages about it. It’s not a secret.
While I get the desire for outrage and backlash, a generous reading of what he said would be something like “In the past, making music meant needing access to numerous instruments and equipment. Today, you can create the same kind of music with a cheap PC and some programs.”
He’s not attacking creativity or saying your time isn’t valuable. He’s saying the barrier to entry has dropped dramatically to the point that almost anyone that wants to create content, can.
Look at any medium and notice the wide array of tools now available to the average person. You can do Photoshop and video effects using entirely free programs for the most part. Or paying a fraction of what you’d have paid in the past for less features.
Under that reading, he’s absolutely correct.
But yeah, Spotify sucks, I get that. They don’t pay creators fairly. Absolutely. Don’t disagree with that.
Blame the raking of the leaves. No leaves in fall means no place for the eggs to be laid and no place for the larvae to grow. It’s another casualty to grass lawns. A “clean” nature is a place where nothing has room to thrive.
We think we are able to. Prove we aren’t just fancy biological computers. No one has proven what consciousness really even is yet.
If the quote was “a million microbes”, maybe you’d have a point. But it’s monkeys. Our closest ancestors. What we are one step removed from. And y’all trying to act like monkeys are robots and were transcendent beings made of energy or some shit. We’re animals, just like them. Slightly smarter, but animals. We are the monkeys.
If no free will, no intention. It’s that simple. In strict determinism, every action, thought, feeling, whatever, was predetermined at the moment of the big bang by the starting state and physics.
I’m absolutely saying that all of humanities creations are “coincidence”. Just because you don’t like what I have to say doesn’t make me stupid. I know what I was describing.
You assume intention. Fallacy of free will. Whoever wrote it, you would claim had “intention”. But given enough humans just faffing about randomly, one will eventually think up and write down “Hamlet”. It’s the same, you just want to ascribe higher meaning to it because it’s human.
It’s like weapons testing. You only move to ban testing after you’ve developed it yourself.