I unironically (mostly) use Bing | Leader of Anav Tsiyr | Self-acclaimed GameJumper | Live ~ 12AM CT
Richmond, VA
Joined April 2009
- Tweets19.1K
- Following2.3K
- Followers671
- Likes68.5K
We need to listen to more voices that aren’t ours. We don’t always have to agree, but we should hear more perspectives that don’t align with our own to gain a fuller understanding of things.
This is always true; reliability & consistency are important because we can understand, measure, & account for the consequences, & learn from them.
When we engage with things we don’t understand, we’re blindly gambling without understanding the rules, let alone how to improve.
The future of #ArtificialIntelligence is not pre-determined. As a technology developed by human beings, its future depends on the choices we make. We therefore have the responsibility to guide, change and, when necessary, reject its applications. A reliable system that serves the human person is of greater value than one that is exceptionally powerful but whose consequences cannot be adequately foreseen or controlled.
It’s actually extremely disturbing the constant misogynistic attacks made against women- calling them drunk or emotional or crazy- instead of ever addressing the substance of what they have to say. Personal attacks are almost always bad, but these don’t even have any basis.
Truly a giant among men.
BREAKING: Patrick Stewart, the beloved actor best known for his iconic roles as Jean-Luc Picard in ‘Star Trek’ and Professor X in ‘X-Men’, dies at 86. nbcnews.to/4swhqWR
Publishing AI “art” that infringes copyrights should be considered copyright infringement where the publisher is held accountable, and the penalties should be steep.
Actually nightmare material.
From me @NRO, with a frightening warning to voters:
A List of Things Democrats Might Do If They Retake Power
nationalreview.com/corner/a-…
DiJaDi retweeted
One of challenges that DOJ will struggle to overcome, whether it's California or Alaska or litigation elsewhere...
Is that it created its own emergency.
The two Dan Sullivans? Knew about that for months.
The alleged noncitizens in California? The President gave an Oval Office speech on it during the summer and Sec. Mullin sent a letter about it during the summer.
And yet...
DOJ didn't take action until October -- after voting had begun.
Why?
I think the most charitable explanation is that it simply didn't have its business in order.
The cynic would say that these suits aren't about actually winning; they're about disruption and chaos and pretext.
I hope it's the former.
The first thing you should always ask when something seems weird or out-of-place is “how weird or out-of-place is it?”
The second is “is it true?”
The third thing you should ask is “what’s the narrative here and who’s telling it?”
The fourth is “what’s the other side?”
The NYT is so desperate to find an October surprise they bury the lede:
1) The staffer retracted her statement.
2) The staffer was a fired disgruntled employee.
3) They stuff this line in the article:
"Ballot-stacking tactics are common in politics and generally considered legal — and have been employed by both parties in Alaska."
When I get angrier, I measure my words more, so fewer might escape, but there’s one word that matters most right now:
Vote.
Every cult has three membership echelons;
Those who know better.
Those who should know better.
Those who don’t know better.
If you’re unhappy with the messaging of others, it’s far more productive to focus on your own messaging or to build a platform to facilitate your messaging than to just constantly attack theirs. It’s harder, but it’s far more valuable. Building something always is.
No kings.
.@POTUS: "Hear ye, hear ye! Please inform the Speaker of the House of Representatives, James Michael Johnson, that the Dumocrat Party has just conceded her seat — Ilhan Nur Said Elmi, her real name, has openly admitted to fraud and she will not be legally allowed to be a Member of this august body!"
Political discourse today seems best exhibited by the inability to even cognitively recognize someone else’s stance- even when it’s explicitly stated- and, instead of attempting to understand or define it, the disturbing comfort of utterly and caricaturely mischaracterizing it.