This is in part one of those situations where your argument amounts to question-begging. The reason being, just as a test: What if Russia was on the correct side of the war, would this still be coherent? Is there any contradiction in these Russian publicity outlets publishing correct information that is then opportunistically used by the rival party to the current US administration to discredit the latter?
If you already assume slava ukra'ini and that reactionaries have some magical inability to say things that are true, you can make a coherent story, but I would argue that the antithesis is at least as coherent a story.
I'm sure RT, etc. also publish bullshit that is also used by the right just as readily, but imo the Russian center-right can get by on policy wrt Ukraine by simply reporting facts faithfully, because theirs is a position [shared by much of the Russian left as well] that is only more justified as historical context increases and actors are more closely scrutinized. I was objectively late to the party when, in 2018, I was reading about the CIA backing Azov, but still I saw reality completely recast leading up to the invasion and thereby I had some advantage over the liberals who seem to believe that Ukraine is Palestine despite the fact that it's Ukraine slaughtering ethnic minorities.
It doesn't help that Ukraine can't seem to find pictures of its military that don't include fascist symbols, or that they absolutely wear their banderite bullshit on their sleeve if you actually listen to them speak. You can just report on these things faithfully and make the Ukrainian government and especially its military look monstrous to many viewers.
Overly-teleological modernist framing has hopelessly fucked up tech discourse. Too much declaring things the future and hoping people will just believe you.
Good riddance, Beehaw is terrible. It was maybe the single biggest exporter of concern-trolling about lemmy.ml and to my knowledge still entertains absurdly reactionary comms for no reason (though I haven't brushed up on my lore in a while). Go make your blue Raddle.
More constructively: Having your "Northern Star" be "intentionally vague" is not a good practice. Having clear rules is a much better way to avoid falling into "what did the mod who reviewed the report feel like doing at the time?" arbitration issues. If you want to serve disenfranchised communities well,* then have that be the foundation and clearly define what that means and why you are doing it.
*My experience with this was that Beehaw was more about first world radlibs patting themselves on the back, but I digress
Whether not having a pause is justified or not, you surely must know this isn't a good response, right? "Just play wildly suboptimally for dramatic effect" is not viable game design.
I didn't remember, though if this is the AI guy then I did read the post. I still need to question the deeply antisocial behavior patterns when it comes to anything having to do with communication, though.
Not that we shouldn't give them credit for whatever good they do, we should.
The bulk of Taiwanese support the status quo, including that being their official diplomatic position, so I think it would go over better than you imagine. The diehard separatists are a minority faction.
Zelensky has openly declared many times that the war would not end until Crimea (a territory Ukraine did not control when Zelensky was elected) was taken back, despite there being no hope of such a victory for the Ukrainian government. He has created a set of parameters where, if he is consistent with what he says, there will never be an election for as long as he survives.
For someone who was elected on the basis of promising to take a more conciliatory stance to the breakaway states, perhaps to avoid exactly the conflict he lead Ukraine into, this shit cannot be reasonable.
He worked with rightists in what is commonly called the "opposition bloc" to destabilize the USSR, toward what end other than hating Stalin I am not even sure. Another member of this bloc was Yagoda, head of the NKVD and a butcher in the Great Purge, second only to his successor Yezhov (whose status in this regard I am unsure of). The bloc will make you lose years from your life trying to get consistent stories out of it if you research it.
As was mentioned elsewhere in the thread, he claimed that the Politburea were fascists and that the Soviets and Nazis represented a unified "camp" competing against the British-Aligned camp (though even in this distortion he recognizes that the Soviets hate the Nazis).
Trotsky flip-flopped on "Lenin's Last Testament", I believe initially recognizing it as the fabrication it was but later holding it up as real for opportunistic reasons.
Ironically, from what I can tell, he also flip-flopped on the "socialism in one country" thing (along with promoting a misrepresentation of it that exists to this day) after first supporting it, before even Stalin did, because once it became Soviet orthodoxy and Trotsky was ousted, it was just another thing to twist to paint them as devils.
Trotsky hated "Stalinism" so much that he was willing to try to collaborate with the actual HUAC against the CPUSA and Stalin, possibly selling out his comrades in Latin America in the process (though this is unclear and he certainly denied it). He failed to, but only because the US side rescinded its invitation.
https://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/archive/trotsky.htm
He was a bastard and every time I research him, I find some new comically disgusting thing he said or did. Stalin should have killed him sooner.
Most Trots are at least slightly better than the man himself, but that's not saying much, and the nicest thing you can say of a given Trot is that they are really an ML with a subcultural affect (or a baby communist who doesn't know better and got swept up by the only game in town).
The normal refutation to this is that the LLM is not "telling" you anything, it is producing an output of characters that, according to its training on its data set, look like a plausible response to the given prompt. This is like using standard conditioning methods to teach a gorilla to make gestures corresponding to "please kill me now" in sign language and using that to justify killing it. They are not "communicating" with the symbols in the sense of the semantic meanings humans have assigned the symbols, because the context they have observed the symbols in and used them for is utterly divorced from those arbitrary meanings.
Americans are the biggest donors, but Britain, Germany, and to a lesser extent Australia and Canada, and a handful of non-German EU countries also give Israel a lot of money.
If all you want to do is sneer, you've got things figured out, but having reactionary elements doesn't mean he has nothing of value to say and, while his affect has some backwards elements of his culture, what he actually discusses is often radically progressive.
In many ways it's also the creative mind sometimes needing some direction a producer gives in general media, and not having that lets them just go absolutely wild is useless work that ends up being scrapped
Hbomb
Personally what intrigues me the most about breadtubers is how they become mild and inoffensive versions of themselves after becoming popular/well-off. Like, what causes that? Is it that the societal problems they criticized no longer applies to them? Is it the allure of advertising money? Is it secret CIA threats? I really do wonder.
Their rage against the machine cools off when the machine starts treating them well
This is in part one of those situations where your argument amounts to question-begging. The reason being, just as a test: What if Russia was on the correct side of the war, would this still be coherent? Is there any contradiction in these Russian publicity outlets publishing correct information that is then opportunistically used by the rival party to the current US administration to discredit the latter?
If you already assume slava ukra'ini and that reactionaries have some magical inability to say things that are true, you can make a coherent story, but I would argue that the antithesis is at least as coherent a story.
I'm sure RT, etc. also publish bullshit that is also used by the right just as readily, but imo the Russian center-right can get by on policy wrt Ukraine by simply reporting facts faithfully, because theirs is a position [shared by much of the Russian left as well] that is only more justified as historical context increases and actors are more closely scrutinized. I was objectively late to the party when, in 2018, I was reading about the CIA backing Azov, but still I saw reality completely recast leading up to the invasion and thereby I had some advantage over the liberals who seem to believe that Ukraine is Palestine despite the fact that it's Ukraine slaughtering ethnic minorities.
It doesn't help that Ukraine can't seem to find pictures of its military that don't include fascist symbols, or that they absolutely wear their banderite bullshit on their sleeve if you actually listen to them speak. You can just report on these things faithfully and make the Ukrainian government and especially its military look monstrous to many viewers.