Did you attend any institution of higher learning?
(Yes) (No)
[No is the right answer]
- Posts
- 11
- Comments
- 1505
- Joined
- 7 mo. ago
- Posts
- 11
- Comments
- 1505
- Joined
- 7 mo. ago
I think it's sort of confirmed as conceptually possible. But that was also 10 years ago, and they're also in telco infrastructure, so they likely don't need more than a typical spyware no-click entry point.
Personally, I would never bother. It's not like the trade off is better equipment.
Nope.
Mett? Hackepeter?
Nope.
Crazy Germans.
To paraphrase from the reaction post about the "what's going with all the China and Russia love lately?" .... Apparently all the .ML instances are so full on anti-Western that they think China, being simply not America, is the "Good Guys." There's a general loss of ability to understand that maybe everyone is shit.
China is understood to have hardware level access to devices, even if you installed Lineage OS, meaning a rootkit is an SMS away even if you're just in it for the hardware.
I might be downvoted for saying the very obvious: this is either naive AF (my guess) or malicious. Most likely just naive and stupid.
Sounds typical, they love manufacturing that kind of misinformation.
On Mint. Love Mint. Deb is life.
Came to say this. The Apollo missions are forks of ICBMs.
We should instead show a picture of Robert Goddard next to his 1926 LO2-fuel rocket and then man on the moon and say "These two images are only 43 years apart." It's objectively more impressive because within an average lifetime at any point in history, we went from rockets as fireworks and weapons to landing on the moon. But it also requires people to know who Robert Goddard is and what he invented.
All those offices with open floorplans are just going to be a auditory nightmare, like some call center every single day.
Quick! To the Interlinear Bible!
OK, so Genesis 18:23 seems to use the same term as "wicked" which is sort of an antonym for righteous or godly. So it's both "bad, evil, naughty" and just "not our religion."
In chapter 19, the Angels are referred to as men, and the "to know them" is the literal term in Hebrew, so it's the standard euphemism.
Even looking at research into this (at a cursory level), it seems that there's no singular sin of which Sodom was a whole was guilty, just sort of blanket "wickedness" like society prior to the deluge. Not even everyone in Sodom as a town was "unrighteous" anyway - Yahweh murdered innocents just to get the other ones. There's not even much in the way of the sin being exclusive to sexual sin only, be that gay or anything else specifically. "Unnatural sex" is a term used once elsewhere, but that is also a term used for same-sex relations.
In the NT, Jude 1:7 refers to their sin as just fornication and being unchaste. So just horny AF. But that's a take from thousands of years after the fact.
It's really just that the inciting incident itself is about a crowd (we presume of men) demanding to rail 2 adult male strangers without their consent. Which, if you read the story is odd because they were planning to sleep outside in the square anyway before Lot gave them a place to stay. So it may simply have been the custom of Sodom (again, if we take this literally, which we should not) to fuck over strangers. That could easily be a sexual thing, it could also mean just rolling someone and stealing their stuff. Or maybe it was a mob of Amazons with ancient strapons planning to peg the strangers. Any of these are possible. But I'm also no expert here or scholar, so please read a real book about this. But usual sources don't seem to necessarily indicate pedophilia at all among the list of sins.
Oh, I heard from a 2004 episode of Art Bell about the Hopi Elders that Native Americans built the pyramids. So maybe it was the Havasupai that live in the Canyon that had people leave and come back? I dunno, it made no sense at all beyond selling books to conspiracy nuts.
I understand your position and everything you're saying. You seem unwilling or unable to understand that you're taking a very surface level view of one aspect of tribalism - you need to dig waaaay deeper here to get to the source and understand this. You're ignoring a huge swath of human behavior to be hyperfocused on one element that doesn't actually work to support your idea.
I ask you to read on as it will support your argument more to dig deeper into human behavior.
So, first, Tribalism as a social grouping methodology is the foundation of all human societies, and which predates racism and even significant genetic diversity. Baked into tribalism is making groups who are threats or compete for resources an "Other." Race is a social construct that came much later that is one narrow use of "othering" a group. Without humans grouping ourselves together first under tribalistic "norms" (norms for early humans in 160,000 years ago), there is no thing to be called race. Other hominids we might compete with were a different species altogether. So we've had tribalism hard-coded into us before language or genetic differences that could be called race existed. That's how far we need to go back.
Here's a study I found real quick that explains tribalism in detail, in case that helps: https://www.jasss.org/22/2/6.html
Next, Blood Feuds are direct evidence, persisting since ancient times, that leaning on racism here is not an accurate assessment. Othering and violence don't demand ethnic differences be present, as othering as a behavior was probably learned long before significant ethnic diversity began to emerge in humans.
In fact, the othering of groups can be so close that these groups can be actual family relations. Literal blood ties can exist and othering can still kick in - hence the title "Blood feud." For example: The Montagues and Capulets of fair Verona, The Hatfields and McCoys should be easy for an American to understand, even Autobots vs. Decepticons wold count. Othering is its own, thing, and sometimes, but not always, race is applied. Race is an immutable characteristic that prevents an Other from changing sides or escaping the conflict, and often provides visual cues from a distance to reinforce use of othering. However, If you look at the list of well-known and existing, modern blood feuds, you'll see that so many exist between people who are not just the same ethnic background, but who are literally siblings and cousins, that there's not much to tie othering as a practice to race alone. It's the other way around - racism is just one application of othering, not all applications of othering.
Case in point: How many families have make their own children Others for any number of reasons not related to race? Sexuality, religion and beliefs, the kind of job they have, drug use or abuse, household norms (i.e. "they're just the Redneck side of the family"), or even just over money - all reasons that blood relations are made pejorative "others" without anything linked to race or ethnicity, such as who they marry, associate with, or sleep with.
OK, so beyond this I expect we'll still agree to disagree. Which is fine, we don't need to agree.
Use of a pejorative term to categorize the "other" serves two purposes. I understand you object to it as a concept, and that's a rational and compassionate thing to do, and I genuinely applaud you for it. I simply chose not to do that.
As race is not a factor here, use of a pejorative term is a means of sub-categorization. To indicate that ChatGPT deserves our derision, and not the machine learning tool that was just used to find new antibiotic formulas. Not all AIs are "Clankers" - in Star Wars, Clankers were droids that committed violence. Droids like C3P0 and R2D2 did not commit violence (well, R2 maybe...). So the pejorative term for droids that are explicitly a threat is, in my view, rational and a logical trigger for human "othering" tendencies when applied to LLMs and AI tools.
Clankers are the LLMs and AI tools that are being used to replace human labor, to make the internet terrible, to generate AI slop, to consume vast resources, and create non-consensual sexual images of humans and children. That the AIs themselves are not sentient any more than a Casio keyboard means that they can be given a pejorative name without humans committing emotional harm against them. Only humans are the victims here, and the tools committing the violence (of varying degrees) are the subject of the othering. This is not ALL machine learning or AI systems - just the ones used to harm humans and our environment.
And, again, this is also something that is a joke most of us will probably forget in about a week anyway.
Look, I'm sorry to hit you with a wall of text, but othering is a much deeper and more sinister aspect of human behavior that we all should understand. I hope for you to understand it not to undermine you in any way, but to help you see that hate of other people can be packaged in many different ways not limited to the narrow context of race, and that it's a failing of humans that we all have to strive to overcome.
Again, no.
Tools of oppression demand 1) someone to be oppressed, and 2) a position of power with which to oppress. Neither of those exist here. How do I with no money oppress something worth billions of dollars?
You mistake tools of solidarity and unification against a common enemy, which seeks to oppress, add "oppression of the oppressor."
My friend... Even a Clanker is not so naive as to misunderstand this. Go ask one. It can explain it to you.
The usual explanation is just "too much wickedness" or some variation. The incident with the crowd trying to rape the 2 angels in the form of 2 dudes precipitates the destruction, but there's a laundry list. But the act of sodomy isn't named after Gomorrah, right? Most sodomy laws are specifically about men having non-procreative sex, and that being illegal.
Again, it's a layered allegory about with who and when to have sex.
🎶🎵Spider hole, Spider Hole...
HEY!
SHUT UP!
Let_him_go_spend_40_months_looking_for_it
Y'ALL, SHUT THE FUCK UP!
No. ChatGPT being overused as a "replacement" for real people doing real jobs made it an "other" against which we rally. Our disdain against which there is no victim.
ChatGPT neither knows nor cares that I call it a Clanker. I'll probably forget about this in a week anyway. But in a week I'll still be reading articles about how companies that lust after money are speculatively laying off people and using AI agents as poor replacements.
You object to the use of any slur. A slur can only be a slur when it communicates hate with the intent of harm. ChatGPT and other LLMs are incapable of feeling emotional harm more than a toaster oven. Understand that disdain for overuse at the expense of real humans is the source of the frustration. There are only human victims.
Famously not always. Apple has proved numerous times they have no access to iphones once the user encrypts them. It's also an added expense and increased attack surface anyway, at the hardware level which is constantly changing, so if there's no legal requirement to do it, why bother? No one gets a prize from the FBI for doing that, and its costs money and time and there would be designers at every individual company who would be able to point directly to the back door. There's no incentive - and there's no evidence of it ever happening. No criminal case has ever shown someone using with Lineage or Graphine on an Adroid phone had their phone hacked by any government for the sole purpose of accessing data on an individual.
Meanwhile, in China, it's a legal requirement from the government that hardware level backdoors exist.
It's kind of a moot point though - at this point commercially available spyware can get in at the software level. It's more so a question of if you think you'll be a target, and targeted by whom? The only 100% sure thing through is that the CCP does have access, with any OS, to any device made and sold by a Chinese company.