I’m so out of the loop after deleting my Twitter account a while ago. Is it now just a porn generator instead of a website?

Was he close on Taiwan? I didn’t know that. Can you say more?

(2% of) Scientists (over there at the fringe) base results on politics!

Once something is wildly misleading, it loses all claim to being accurate in any measure. This is the kind of “accuracy” that Satan applies when lying based on a grain of truth.

Thing could slow down if it loses velocity. Film at 11.

One factor here is that they are all under pressure from their boards and investors not to miss the AI wave and get left behind. All companies are doing some level of AI theater. Some actually believe it. But it’s not like hundreds of CEOs all came to this judgment purely on their own, with no outside influences. It’s a mass craze.

I’m not endorsing that case. It simply exists - Trump’s actions are not random bizarro nonsense from out of the blue.

Retract your claws, please. I can describe what they are doing and thinking without endorsing it.

Perhaps you would find this other comment that I posted to Reddit more complete.

Answer: (Please note that I’m going to detail what Trump and others are thinking here but that doesn’t mean I agree with them. Some of this is basic facts but a lot is POV. In particular I recognize that the American notion of “homeland defense” is incredibly aggressive, requiring a huge region of total control around the country and far afield, where the US wants to constantly project power toward its perceived adversaries).

1. United States military believes that Greenland is of great strategic importance, especially as the ice up north disappears to open up more shipping lanes. Greenland is near some key shipping lanes, some key undersea internet lines, and is also just a big area of land between the US and Russia that the US wants defended to its general standard in terms of air dominance, missile defense, and readiness to repel invasion.
2. United States military does not believe that Denmark is sufficiently guarding or even monitoring this region, and has already successfully negotiated to have some US bases up there to plug this hole. But they want more: complete control. The US does not like to have any dependencies on anyone for its defense.
3. Greenland is rich in rare earth metals and those are importent for the future because they’re needed for advanced tech. China currently has a near monopoly on the world’s reserves and the US considers that a strategic threat. You can’t power a modern military without chips. And even if the US is able to get its own chip foundries going to reduce dependence on Taiwan, they still need the minerals.
4. There is a long history of the US both criticizing Denmark’s management of the place (or lack of defense spending there), and of the US trying to buy the territory. Trump sees an opportunity to grab something and he doesn’t give a fuck if Europe or American liberals get flustered by it. In his view: the US is vulnerable unless Greenland is managed right, and no one is doing that. The country even lacks the population to truly mine their minerals or manage the corruption that is always a risk when a small nation comes into a flood of commodity wealth.

So basically the hawkish elements of the US think that Greenland is 1. A strategic vulnerability for the US and 2. Just sitting there not being managed properly or at all. And since Trump has no respect for anyone, he actually likes the idea of grabbing this land. He doesn’t think anyone will actually do anything about it except complain. It will burnish his legacy and in his mind, strengthen America. He doesn’t think that Allies strengthen the US, he thinks that our Allies depend on the US. So in his mind we should be able to do what we think we need to because the entire world is depending on us for stability and defense.

Far be it from me to defend a Trump in any way, but the American desire to control Greenland does pre-date his presidency by a good stretch and it will still be a fond wish of the Department of War after he is gone. Trump is in this one personally because he thinks it will be a jewel of his legacy to add territory to the country. And he is always up for confrontational harassment of Europe and brandishing his sword as CIC. But Greenland specifically was put on his agenda by others in security defense circles. There is a case for it, and that case isn’t old and tired, it’s getting stronger as ice melts.

I understand what you are saying. Verification is just about identity - it’s not validation.

Except it’s about validation on one very basic level. I’ve seen the inside of large social media moderation operations and you are missing one thing. These companies will not verify an account for The Islamic State, no matter how readily they can prove that they are who they say they are. They will not just sit there as a neutral party and say Osama Bin Laden? Looks real to me! They will ban and block and log and report.

ICE are in open warfare against American civilians and BlueSky just said “yep your id checks out.” They could have said “we will not be a megaphone for a rogue agency waging war on Minneapolis.” As for gathering evidence to hang them with later… their BlueSky tweets are not going to add much to the video footage we have of them killing people in the streets.

It’s not about verification per se. Since anyone can create an account directly, no BlueSky accounts are necessarily reviewed by BlueSky. Someone could create an account for Nazi pedos who drink blood and you wouldn’t blame BlueSky for that immediately. But if BlueSky came along and said “hm, yes, you are verified” then they have in an explicit way endorsed the account’s ability to exist. Basically the account passed moderation. Since many consider ICE to be an illegally deployed terror force on American soil, it’s you know, a little disappointing to see anyone treat them as a legitimate entity on any level. A democratic president worth his salt will disband the organization on day 1 and sponsor legislation to prevent them ever coming back.

It means that a little more than it means they disagree with them.

ICE are masked jackboot thugs illegally deployed to our streets by a psychopathic rapist to punish people who don’t vote for him. If there is ever a time to resist tyranny….

“Welcome. Let’s see what you have to say” is not an appropriate reaction to their presence.

I keep hearing this line about how there might not be an election. Even Russia holds elections. They’re total shams, but it’s easier to cheat on an election than to throw out your entire form of government. People still believe a little bit in the legitimacy of American elections so Trump will definitely try to steal one rather than cancel it. Once no one even gives a shit about them, then they might get canceled. But that brings me back to… places like Russia still hold them, even when everyone knows they are bunk.

But without them, he’s nothing. This is his personal brand now: the anti-Trump. He has to invite these guys onto his show so he can say edgy things to them.

You are absolutely right about that. Passively detecting your location? Fuck that. We are getting into an era where bots are overwhelming and user verification is a valid topic to discuss. I think additional device permissions can be one element in that discussion. But this idea he popped off the dome is a miserable example of such.

That’s a fair point. Reddit has been openly hostile to its own users these past several years. It might help moderate that to have another alternative on the table, even if it too is a soulless corporate enterprise.

“When I signed up to help the Russian war effort, I thought I’d be well behind the front lines!”

Yeah, fuck you, Omar.

The article has this to say:

After cross-checking information obtained from reliable sources, including the Supreme National Security Council and the presidential office, the initial estimate by the Islamic Republic’s security institutions is that at least 12,000 people were killed in this nationwide killing.

This makes it sound like their 12k number is coming from… the government doing the killing? I’m a little confused about that. It doesn’t seem conventional for dictators to release casualty counts for their pogroms. Are they perhaps trying to send a threatening message to everyone to stay home, and puffing up that number?

Gotta love that free speech absolutism.

Beware the man with one book.

No, I mean: “As Wikipedia cites sources, so do these AI tools.”

Ie: these tools cite sources, like Wikipedia.

I realize now that was unclear.