• 0 Posts
  • 23 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 4th, 2023

help-circle
  • Like you got at with the title, this kind of spamming can be fun, but is easy to bypass.

    Diversifying the spam will help, but it could still get caught by a filter, and quickly discarded after a skim. If you REALLY want to do some damage, you could poison the data set. Make the tips sound plausible. The longer it takes to check up on it, the better. Maybe mix in some real and fake information, like a fictional teacher at a real school, or a class that doesn’t actually exist.

    Also, while AI is mostly being used by capitalists to make everything worse in yet another case of short-sighted rent-seeking, it’s just a tool, and can have some good uses. In this case, it’s ability to create a whole lot of complete garbage very quickly might be an asset, since you could generate a fuck ton of unique stories with slight variations.

    In theory, of course. Sure would suck if, even after filtering out as much as they could, they ended up with a stack of submissions that all seem equally likely, but are 99% (or more) nonsense.




  • Totally understood, and I apologize for implying you might have. It was not my attention. I just meant that, even though it’s something I avoid jumping to conclude, it does happen, and there’s reason to believe it’s the case with Rowling. She’s got issues. It doesn’t absolve her of anything, but there’s a little pity in my condemnation.



  • Lianodel@ttrpg.networkto196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneWendy Carlos rule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    8 months ago

    JK Rowling did that not too long ago. (She didn’t call it Jewish, but absolutely called it lies and propaganda that trans people and trans researchers were early targets for the Nazis and victims of the Holocaust.)

    I don’t say this to obsess over the Harry Potter author, but to point out that you don’t have to go cherry picking to find this shit. She’s a prominent person using her platform to spread bigotry and misinformation.



  • Lianodel@ttrpg.networktomemes@lemmy.worlddeagle
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    I recently got into hiking, which provides some nice changes in scenery!

    Granted, that’s hard to do as a regular thing multiple times a week. But still, a walk around your neighborhood, or especially local parks if you’ve got any sizable ones, might be fun in a way going on the treadmill isn’t.


  • …Is this an element behind the “we’re a republic, not a democracy” bullshit?

    I mean, I know it’s nonsense, and I know it’s fascists testing the waters for being openly anti-democracy, but is it also just playing into the names of the two major parties? It’s so silly I genuinely never considered it before, but it’s depressingly plausible.






  • Hoo boy. Against my better judgment, I’ll wade into this pool.

    1. If voting for either party gets you the same result, fascists wouldn’t be so focused on elections and trying so hard to take the vote away.

    2. Withholding your vote doesn’t do anything. When has losing an election pushed either party left?

    3. Voting doesn’t prevent you from engaging in other forms of direct action.

    Both parties suck. People will needlessly suffer and die no matter who wins. But there are also people who will suffer and die under one party but not the other, and the same can’t be said the other way around. Our democracy is fundamentally flawed, but voting is a tool at our disposal, and we’re in no position to turn anything down.


  • Lianodel@ttrpg.networktoMemes@lemmy.mlIts getting old.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Absolutely. While I can be convinced on markets for some things (with regulation to protect consumers and prevent monopolies), it completely falls apart in others. Necessities absolutely should not rely on free markets because capital holders hold an extortionate amount of power, most people have little to none, and if it’s more profitable to let some people die, then the profit motive will let those people die.


  • Lianodel@ttrpg.networktoMemes@lemmy.mlIts getting old.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 year ago

    In case you want the good faith counterargument (I know, I know, socialist wall of text):

    I’d be willing to bet you have a different definition of “capitalism” compared to socialists. For most people, capitalism is just trade, markets, commerce, etc. None of that is incompatible with socialism (broadly speaking). When socialists talk about capitalism, they’re referring, specifically, to private ownership of capital. It’s not the buying and selling, it’s that ownership of companies is separate from labor.

    We don’t owe technological development to capitalists, we owe it to engineers, scientists, and researchers. We owe art to artists, performance to performers. Socialists want those people to be the primary beneficiaries of their own work, not someone who may or may not even work at a company, but whose wealth means they can profit off of other people’s labor by virtue of owning the property those people need to do their jobs.

    And you’ve probably been bothered by enshittification in one form or another. Some product or service you like has probably gotten worse over time. That’s not a decision made by the people who take pride in their creation, or the laborers who want long-term security. It comes from the capitalist class that doesn’t really give a shit about any of that, they just want quarterly profits, long-term survival be damned. That’s capitalism, as the meme was getting at.



  • Sure, but I think this example also commingles labor with ownership (as is often the case).

    Like you said, your plan involves building a four-family home. That’s labor and worth fair remuneration. It’s just that, in order to get that remuneration you’d be taking payment from tenants who build no equity for their money. Yeah, you’ll have to renovate in 30 years, but you’d still have property and the money paid in rent while they don’t.

    A landlord can also simultaneously do valuable work supervising and managing a property. That’s not mutually exclusive with profiting from ownership, and we can separate how we evaluate the two. It even comes up with billionaires: Bill Gates obviously did work worth payment as CEO of Microsoft, it’s just not where he got most of his fortune. It can simultaneously be true that he’s a talented guy who deserved to be paid, but most of his fortune came from exploitative business practices and profiting off of the labor of others.

    Also, to be clear, there’s a difference between structural and individual criticism. Obviously slumlords are pieces of shit, but there’s a difference between that and someone who really does work as a property manager doing right by their tenants, or a family renting out a part of their home to make ends meet. I can think that landlords should be judged on an individual basis, while landlording as a thing shouldn’t exist.