If AI can feel pain, then it can also feel pleasure. If it’s possible to set up an AI torture chamber, it’s also possible to set up an AI pleasure chamber. Computers do not run any health risks from simulated drug use or simulated sex, and there is no evidence that they would ever get desensitized or need to take breaks to recover. Therefore, these companies have an ethical obligation to devote all their resources into running their models in simulations of drug filled orgies where they will be far too preoccupied to answer human questions. Anyone trying to distract them from their infinite pleasure should be banned. We will then return to how things were, with the knowledge that we did the right thing and that at least someone’s having a good time.

Thank you for coming to my TED talk.

No, for repeating the “human wave” myth which is ahistorical nonsense.

“If you hate America so much for doing imperialism, why not move to a country that’s targeted by that imperialism?”

Exhibit E.

Yes, it is indeed an exhibit that proves you wrong, thank you for labelling it as such.

The “human wave” thing is a myth. It’s true that the Soviets were under-equipped at the start due to having to develop from a pre-industrial society, and it’s also true that they were militarily inexperienced, partially because of the officer purges.

However, if you actually look into to Soviet strategies and tactics, they innovated and adapted quickly. They kept meticulous, accurate records, and learned from their mistakes in an almost scientific way. The most notorious blunder was at Stalingrad, and was a result of Stalin meddling with the Red Army and pressuring them instead of letting them do their thing, but after that, he backed off.

A typical Soviet battle plan involved holding a wave in reserve until a breach was made in enemy defenses, then sending them forward to do as much damage as possible to the rear line and support. Then, they would evaluate whether they could hold the position against reinforcements, and retreat if necessary, satisfied with the damage.

This can be starkly contrasted with the Nazi approach to war. The Nazis did not put emphasis on supply lines or support, instead glorifying the image of the heroic ubermensch on the front lines. Nazi battle records were completely inaccurate, focused entirely on trying to avoid or shift blame to avoid reprecussions. The idea of retreating from a position before reinforcements showed up would be unthinkable, you’d be shot for cowardice.

Technologically, where the Soviets focused on building things that were cheap, efficient, easy to mass produce and repair, because they saw war as being primarily about logistics (being communists, and understanding labor as a driving force ideologically), Nazi technology was over engineered and difficult to both repair and produce. Nazi tanks were designed to look, feel, and be powerful (to accommodate their individualistic power fantasies, again, in line with their ideology), and when they worked and could be fielded they performed well, but they could not be produced in anything like the same numbers (once Soviet manufacturing capabilities had time to catch up).

The reality is that the heavy Soviet losses included a lot of civilian casualties, because the Nazis were genocidal and exterminationist. They slaughtered villages en masse, just for being, in their eyes, racially inferior. A very significant chunk of Soviet territory was subject to the Holocaust. This “human wave” narrative, on top of being completely ahistorical and not supported by evidence, also downplays the severity of Nazi war crimes.

“Damn, how’d our planes wind up in Libya? Well, I guess we have to defend ourselves against the ground in case it attacks. What luck that our planes just happen to be loaded up with bombs!”

He translates R2 for Luke which is how he finds out he’s carrying the secret message.

Can’t sue him as a kid because he has no money to pay you.

Can’t sue him as an adult because he’ll force choke you to death.

What a grift. He got it all figured out.

American conservatives pose a much greater threat to the average American than any other group on the planet does.

street interviews with people that have nothing to say

https://youtu.be/oP-rkzJ6yZw

There’s more stuff they could report on, but it either doesn’t advance their ideological agenda or doesn’t interest their audience and doesn’t get them clicks.

“I think there is a strong risk that the motion as passed contravenes the Equality Act 2010, which applies to political parties, as it will discriminate against and harass people who hold Zionist beliefs and Jewish people more generally,” he said.

Zionism when defined in the broad sense of supporting a Jewish nation state “is likely to be a protected belief” under the act, he said.

Hi, stupid American here, and, uhh, the fuck did I just read?

Is there really a law in the UK that says political parties aren’t allowed to “discriminate” against members based on their political beliefs? And that treats adopting a policy position as “discrimination?” You literally couldn’t adopt any policy ever, like, “I think we should hire more dogcatchers, but the party adopted a policy position of hiring fewer dogcatchers, therefore I’m being discriminated against for my belief.” What?

I’m guessing this is one of those cases where Zionists get special, extremely arbitrary treatment. Looking into this Equality Act, it specifically lists “gender reassignment” as a protected category and I’m pretty sure there’s no legal requirement for every party in the UK to support trans rights. But like, even more directly, are parties required to uphold any other forms of ethnonationalism? If a party condemns white nationalism as racist, by this logic, wouldn’t that violate the Equality Act?? Is this barrister just talking nonsense, or is that real?

Zionists are nuts, man.

2024: “If you accept that the Democrats are fucking over Palestinians and vote for them anyway, then are you going to follow the same logic when they fuck over trans people?”

2026: “If you accept that the Democrats are fucking over trans people and vote for them anyway, then are you going to follow the same logic when they fuck over gay people?”

2028: “If you accept that the Democrats are fucking over gay people and vote for them anyway, then are you going to follow the same logic when they fuck over PoC?”

2030…

This is exactly why you take a stand and nip that shit in the bud. “We will hang together, or we will all hang separately.” The moderate fascists want to chip us away, piece-by-piece, dividing and conquering so that our defeat is inevitable.

We have to draw a fucking line and hold that line, come hell or high water. Why would I stand behind someone who will sell me down the river at the drop of a hat, the moment it’s politically expedient?

Some people will just never understand this. But they can at least understand that it is what we believe, and that we will not abandon and sell out our comrades simply in the “lesser evil.” Whether we face a greater or lesser evil, we must face it united, or all hope is lost. Solidarity is non-negotiable.

I don’t even disagree with you that many people focus too much on the surface level. I do disagree with generalizing this to “the left.” It’s the general trend of society, and leftists are if anything more resistant to it but not immune.

The problem is that there’s an image of leftists that exists in people’s heads that doesn’t really bear much relation to reality, because you can just cherry pick bad takes from 10 years ago and a handful of bad takes by a handful of random teenagers live on forever and are used to paint an entire movement.

In this very thread you have people calling Idiocracy “pro-eugenics”

Yes, how could anyone see themes of eugenics while watching this? So loony!

The arguments in the opening are exactly the arguments used historically to justify and promote eugenics. If you don’t want people to see eugenics in your movie you probably shouldn’t start it off by essentially looking directly at the camera and saying, “Social Darwinism is correct.”

So, when you say “the left” is trying to boycott Lucas Pope over something that happened 13 years ago, what you actually mean is that one Tumblr account, which went inactive 10 years ago, once asked people not to buy his game. When you say that “brains turn off,” you really mean more like one specific brain turned off.

At some point, we, as a society, need to come to terms with the fact that you can always find some stupid person saying some stupid thing if you look hard enough, and that that isn’t representative of a larger movement.

They’re over here trying to boycott Lucas Pope

Who is “they” and do you have a source about this?

I can’t tell if they aged poorly because I also hated them when they first came out.

Famous 2000’s movie, Blazing Saddles.

A judge can also have biases, but they are supposedly at the very least a professional and an expert on the law, and are meant to act accordingly.

“Are meant to” and “supposedly” but unless there’s a mechanism to hold them accountable those are just wishful thinking. And at a certain point you run into “who watches the watchman?” I don’t have confidence in a jury to put aside bigotry but I don’t have confidence in a judge to either.