I would compare this to Lorena Bobbitt. You have a point in that this girl tracked him down, but arguably he presented an ongoing threat as long as he was free—especially if he knew she was the reason he got busted. But she also probably relived the abuse constantly in her head. Years and years of abuse redefines who you are as a person.
Self defense might be a stretch, but were I on that jury she'd never see the inside of a cell.
"Baffle them with bullshit" has been a saying for quite a while. But with Trump it's more like "give them a stupidity migraine." The stuff that comes out of his mouth hurts my brain to hear it.
You can't help but to try to parse some meaning out of his words. They sound like English. But he assembles them in an arcane order where the harder you try to understand him, the less anything he says makes sense. He is like a human word cloud where you just have to infer the message based on the biggest, boldest words.
So yes, it's hard to beat an opponent in a debate when you have to try to understand what he's saying in order to form a cogent counterpoint. His audience of the hearing- and vocabulary-impaired only absorb the gist without ever attempting to parse actual meaning out of it.
It is truly a thing of wonder, and if the future of our nation didn't hinge on it, it would be fascinating to explore. I hope future generations, unburdened by the threat of another Trump Presidency, might be able to study this and harness this power for good.
Probably be better off talking to a teacher once school starts. They are mandatory reporters if abuse is happening. Also there are tools at the school like counselors and potentially support groups that police probably won't have.
She knows not to trust it. If the AI had suggested "God did it" or metaphysical bullshit I'd reevaluate. But I'm not sure how to even describe that to a Google search. Sending a picture and asking about it is really fucking easy. Important answers aren't easy.
I mean I agree with you. It's bullshit and untrustworthy. We have conversations about this. We have lots of conversations about it actually, because I caught her cheating at school using it so there's a lot of supervision and talk about appropriate uses and not. And how we can inadvertently bias it by the questions we ask. It's actually a great tool for learning skepticism.
But some things, a reasonable answer just to satisfy your brain is fine whether it's right or not. I remember in chemistry I spent an entire year learning absolute bullshit about chemistry only for the next year to be told that was all garbage and here's how it really works. It's fine.
I don't buy into it, but it's so quick and easy to get an answer, if it's not something important I'm guilty of using LLM and calling it good enough.
There are no ads and no SEO. Yeah, it might very well be bullshit, but most Google results are also bullshit, depending on subject. If it doesn't matter, and it isn't easy to know if I'm getting bullshit from a website, LLM is good enough.
I took a picture of discolorations on a sidewalk and asked ChatGPT what was causing them because my daughter was curious. Metal left on the surface rusts and leaves behind those streaks. But they all had holes in the middle so we decided there were metallic rocks missed into the surface that had rusted away.
Is that for sure right? I don't know. I don't really care. My daughter was happy with an answer and I've already warned her it could be bullshit. But curiosity was satisfied.
I didn't mean to imply the suit isn't legitimate. I'm sure out of all of them Starlink is the worst because Elon is such a fucking moron. I'm just not going to cheer the winner either way. I'm glad all the bad guys are fighting and I hope they have a bad quarter over it.
Wow. I hate everyone here. I can't even say I hope the lawyers take everyone for lots of money because if someone is a lawyer for one of these companies, I hate them, too.
How about they just meet on the field of battle and sort it out that way?
I don't recall when I first started using the internet. Late 80's or very early 90's. No WWW back then. It was all IRC and gopher and newsgroups and other things I don't remember. I lived near MSU, so I could dial in for free because it was a local call.
And then once you got in, it was hard to find anything to actually do. It kinda felt like exploring Mars. But eventually I found things. Very exclusive club and very good times that I miss. No advertisements. No one trying to make a sale.
it's often nitpicks ("I think one thing you said is wrong")
I think this happens. I know I've done it but I've expressly stated my agreement with everything else but hey this one thing needs examination. I think sometimes people leave that part unsaid and maybe they forgot or maybe they just don't have good arguments against.
Note I'm not mentioning anything else. It's because I largely agree with what you've said or don't think a counterpoint would be helpful.
I think the difference is when you have a small group everyone sort of considers themselves co-custodians of a space—lifting each other up and helping people integrate. But get enough people and it starts getting exhausting constantly trying to enforce norms against an ever growing community of people who don't understand or respect them. It's like social enshittification.
Our memory is so unreliable. I have some very clear memories from my childhood that I can prove to myself couldn't have happened the way I remember.
I have no reason to doubt this happened, especially since repressing memories is a trauma response, but proving it in court without good corroborating evidence is going to be nigh impossible.
Based on the additional details—black and white, very pixelated graphics, swinging from powerlines, and floating bananas—it's likely that the game you're thinking of is Bananarama, also known as Monkeys! on the classic Macintosh.
Bananarama was a simple black-and-white game released in the mid-1980s, where the player controlled a monkey swinging from vines or powerlines, collecting bananas. The bananas often floated in mid-air and twirled, matching the description given. The game had a very pixelated look typical of early Macintosh games.
This seems to align closely with what you've described, so it might be the game you're looking for!
Sorry! Maybe someone else will know. I asked it for other guesses but they all seemed pretty weak. I guess check Simian Acres but they were some low quality guesses. Like "Maybe they are thinking of Lemonade Stand and just hallucinated monkeys." Either way I'm bowing out. I never had a Mac until like 2022 so I can't go off memory. Good luck!
As I've gotten older, I find most of the stereotypes I grew up believing were bullshit and not particularly useful for classifying the subjects of the stereotype—however I do find they help me categorize the people who believe them.
So you're a white dude who thinks black people like fried chicken and watermelon? They do. So do white people because that shit is cheap and delicious. But you're a racist.
All cops are bad? The last few years have been revelatory about a problem that has existed for decades. But you're a moral absolutist and not someone to discuss nuanced issues with.
Republicans are better with the economy/foreign policy? You liked Regan and never grew out of it.
The stereotypes themselves aren't really useful, but understanding the speaker is sometimes helpful.
I would compare this to Lorena Bobbitt. You have a point in that this girl tracked him down, but arguably he presented an ongoing threat as long as he was free—especially if he knew she was the reason he got busted. But she also probably relived the abuse constantly in her head. Years and years of abuse redefines who you are as a person.
Self defense might be a stretch, but were I on that jury she'd never see the inside of a cell.