The issue isn’t that you’re presenting opinions, but trying to pander conspiracy theories as facts, that’s misinformation by definition.

Then why are you spreading misinformation?

I doubt it. It doesn’t make sense to go after him specifically. His reach wasn’t really that big prior to his death. He like many other conservative grifters peaked in 2016, and he’s been declining ever since. It also doesn’t make sense because he’s a big Trump ass licker, and he never really wavered from that. There’s no reason to target him over someone like Tucker Carlson for example.

I think the simplest explanation is often what turns out to be the correct one. I think it’s more likely that some rando who hated him for either being too far right or not far right enough took the opportunity to kill him when they had the chance. Considering how the shooting took place in Utah, there’s definitely no shortage of whackos who would do such a thing.

Lemmy’s content quality has been nosediving because of shit like this. Stop spreading conspiracy theories. If you have some sort of direct evidence showing there’s a link then post it and a discussion will be had, but making speculative claims with no proof is just misinformation.

deleted by creator

You should never use TOR as a daily driver.

People who talk like this tend to not interact with anyone, they just sit in their house all day writing comments like this

Lol what? This parasite is the driving the force behind nuclear weapons AND behind funding all terrorist proxy militias that have been destabilizing Yemen, Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria. He can rest in piss.

He might not, but whoever will replace most certainly will even if the Ukraine war is over. The precedent has been set, and it’s rather effective. If an idiot like Trump can achieve this much, imagine what a competent administration might be able to pull off.

Is there like a database that keeps track of things like this? Not just deaths, but also things like arrests, suspicious disappearances and the like. I feel like that would be a very useful tool for these types of discussions. I’m sure the top performers are going to be the ones we suspect the most, but having the ability to visualize the data can give some pretty good insights nonetheless.

I don’t necessarily disagree with you here, I also think that no generative LLM is worth paying for, let alone a subscription with such a ridiculous price. However, I can still at least understand the appeal for a certain niche subset of people who constantly do the few stuff that a generative LLM like chatgpt excels at.

They’re extremely helpful, just not at a professional level. They can help a student proof read an essay or a content creator come up with a script, but they can’t help you code an app from scratch or give you a medical diagnosis.

Is there a company that’s trying to destroy itself as much as Ubisoft? The CEO and board that’s running this company are genuinely some of the dumbest motherfuckers in the world. These idiots are still dedicating significant resources to make NFT games, they’re still trying to insist that microtransactions are fun, they refuse to do anything to make their games more enjoyable to players, and they’re trying everything in their power to squeeze out their talent. At this point, Ubisoft deserves to collapse.

Removed by mod

Did YOU read what you said?

Your entire spiel from before was literally nothing more than a collection of fallacies. You used a false equivalence by comparing worst case domestic repression (death squads) to foreign data misuse, which are fundamentally different types of risk and not logically comparable. It engages in whataboutism by deflecting concerns about China’s data access with references to American authoritarian threats, which doesn’t actually refute the original concern. The argument also builds a straw man by reducing all China related security worries to racist “Yellow Peril” panic, ignoring more nuanced, non racial critiques about state power and influence. Finally, it also leans on appeals to extreme outcomes and fear, invoking Nazis and executions to shut down debate rather than assess proportional, evidence based risks. Together, these fallacies prove two things: 1) You’re engaging in bad faith and 2) your points were inherently flawed and logically unsound.

Like what even is the thesis supposed to be, that the concerns about China aren’t real or serious because propaganda exists or because other threats exist? It’s such a nonsensical take. People aren’t concerned about China because of propaganda, they’re concerned because China’s actions, intentions, and track record raise a lot of red flags that are concerning. It doesn’t take a genius to see that something nefarious is going on with these Chinese apps. Like for example…

• Why is the international version of TikTok banned in China?
• Why does the domestic version of the app and the international one use different algorithms?
• The CCP has unrestricted control over all corporations in China, how much of the data collection is directly ordered from the government?
• There are reports from multiple countries stating that China is collecting massive amounts of data for military purposes, what are they collecting and why?
• China is also well known for spending tens of billions on propaganda campaigns, are they using the data from apps like TikTok to more effectively manipulate public opinions around the globe to further their interests?
• What about the secret police networks that the CCP has established in foreign cities where there’s large populations of ethnic Chinese residing? Countries around the globe have uncovered hundreds of these networks, is the CCP using this data to find, target, and silence dissent?

These are are valid concerns that you’re trying to conveniently dismiss because you’re either ignorant of them or you’re being dishonest. Like do you not find any of these things even slightly concerning? Trying to chalk up these legitimate concerns as nothing more than product of fearmongering and propaganda is the most intellectually lazy way to dismiss them because you can’t be bothered to parse through the implications and consequences.

If you don’t care about things like privacy, tyranny, freedom, ownership, safety, and the like then that’s your problem. However, just because you don’t care that doesn’t mean others don’t or that their concerns are product of propaganda. If anything that’s a more of a reflection of you and how your own beliefs came to be. Your stance, even if we ignore all the fallacies, isn’t even a principled one. At least what I’m saying is consistent and principled. You on the other hand? You’re acting smug over a disingenuous, fallacious, and inconsistent stance, it’s, as you would say, fucking pathetic.

We can agree to that

It’s not impossible. You could build a model that’s built on consent where the data it’s trained on is obtained ethically, data collected from users is anonymized, and users can opt out if they want to. The current model of shameless theft isn’t the only path there is.

I don’t disagree per se, but I think there’s a pretty big difference between people using chatgpt for correcting grammar or drafting an email and people using it generate a bunch of slop images/videos. The former is a more streamlined way to use the internet which has value, while the latter is just there for the sake of it. I think its feasible for newer LLM designs to focus on what’s actually popular and useful, and cutout the fat that’s draining a large amounts of resources for no good reason.

Idk most people I know don’t see it as a magic crystal ball that’s expected to answer all questions perfectly. I’m sure people like that exist, but for the most part I think people understand that these LLMs are flawed. However, I know a lot of people who use them for everyday tasks like grammar checks, drafting emails/documents, brainstorming, basic analysis, and so on. They’re pretty good at these sort of things because that’s what they’re built for. The issue of privacy and greed remain, and I think some of the issues will at least be partially solved if they were designed with privacy in mind.

Idk what about the people who stayed. I just remember how the original wave from TikTok was rejected, and how there were a lot oblivious western TikTok users who were shocked that the Chinese user base on Rednote didn’t embrace them with open arms when they invaded.