Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)K

kava

@ kava @lemmy.world

Posts
0
Comments
419
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • MAGA melts down over Super Bowl halftime performance

    Jump

  • I don't claim to be an activist. I'm interested in the ideological undercurrents

    You want revolution without the mess, rebellion without the noise, but that’s not how this works.

    This is the very thing I'm claiming about the performance. It's controlled rebellion. Performative dissent. Dissent and dissatisfaction itself becomes commodified and sold back to you. It allows the viewer to feel like they're part of something revolutionary without ever threatening the system. Imagine a safety valve, releasing just enough pressure to prevent real change. It's like a laugh track in a sitcom. It tells you what to feel. You can have the experience of laughing without actually having to laugh.

    This type of "socially conscious" art (movies, music, etc) functions in a way lets the consumer feel like they have participated in something emancipatory without actually having to. It's ideology.

    Note at no point did he criticize the status quo. He did not mention president Trump, who was present in the crowd, at all. Kendrick, a legendary socially conscious rapper who is an icon for life- chose not to say anything at all. Why?

    Either a) he doesn't care or b) he understands there is a very small window of acceptable "dissent" he is allowed to express. I think this micro-dose of dissent pacifies and sedates the viewer.

    hijacked their platform and made them pay for it

    He made them pay? He made them hundreds of millions of dollars. This was the most highly viewed super bowl performance in my adult life.

    this isn’t about your approval.

    You seem to care more about my approval than I do. What difference does it make if I approve? I liked the performance but I'm discussing the ideological basis for these styles of performative vague dissent.

    Me and you both are constantly eating from the trash can of ideology. It's painful, but it's worthwhile to put on the glasses so you can at least see what you are eating. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVwKjGbz60k

  • MAGA melts down over Super Bowl halftime performance

    Jump

  • Kendrick dropping truth bombs on the NFL’s biggest stage

    What truth bombs did he drop? Some vaguely rebellious sounding lines? "The revolution will be televised?"

    This was milquetoast at best. Actively harmful at worst. I really enjoyed the performance but he is doing exactly what he criticizes the record labels of doing. Taking black culture and commodifying it by turning it into a spectacle.

    This was corporate spectacle and nothing more.

    "Come, comrades, and claim your Che Guevara t-shirts. Indulge that half-buried discontent with the system by picking up these subversive punk rock accessories. For a fleeting moment, we’ll even add a trans flag poster—yours for nothing but shipping and handling. Put on the revolution you crave."

  • S&P says effects of Trump's tariff plans 'overwhelmingly negative'.

    Jump

  • It was always meant to be a show

    The border is over 1,500 miles. It's so wildly expensive and impractical to build a wall over all of it that the notion is absurd. And if you build a wall, people will climb over it. They will bury underneath it. They will cut through it. Etc

    Even if he had succeeded there is little chance it would have meaningfully stemmed the tide of illegals coming across the border. Trump was fully aware of this. But it's doesn't matter- like I said- it was show. Americans don't want a complicated speech on the nuances of economic migrant migration to the US. They don't want to hear about labor shortages in the US and the changing demographics.

    It's much easier to say "We're building a Wall" and everybody applauds. Trump on a fundamental level understands this very well. And he's really really good at it.

    Having said all that- it doesn't even take into considering more than majority of illegals in the US did not cross the border at all. They come on legal visas at legal ports of entries like airports and just overstay their visa. So the Wall is incapable of even impacting the largest source of illegal immigrants.

    what didn’t happen was the result of concentrated effort. This time the dems seem more resigned

    The Dems have slowly been joining the GOP in the anti-immigrant rhetoric.

    Joe Biden near the end of his turn did a photoshoot with CBP and talked about strong borders and used the world "illegal" in a speech. He promised to halt the construction of "the Wall"- he instead expanded construction.

    Back when Biden was running initially he campaigned on "a compassionate approach to immigration". Kamala, however, campaigned on "strong border and national security"

    The entire country is becoming radicalized. That isn't to say GOP (and Trump especially) is more extreme, but a rising tide lifts all boats. or maybe sinks them, I don't know

  • Why Mark Zuckerberg wants to redefine open source so badly

    Jump

  • Literally 3+ billion people’s lives are the training data.

    yep. I never thought about it but you're absolutely right. that is Facebook's "competitive advantage" that the other AI companies don't have.

    although that's part of it. I'm sure they do web scraping, novels, movie transcripts, college textbooks, research papers, newspapers, etc.

  • S&P says effects of Trump's tariff plans 'overwhelmingly negative'.

    Jump

  • i wonder if it's all just a big show. he threatened tariffs to mexico and canada. when canada said "ok bro fuck you too" all of a sudden they come to an agreement to delay. similar story in Mexico. in a few weeks he'll say "i got the best deal out of the history of deals. Mexico and Canada are gonna pay their fair share" and people will forget about it to focus on the next ludicrous thing he says

    i wonder if it's gonna be the same with the deportations. something like 5% of the workforce is illegal. and they are highly concentrated in specific industries. it would wreck havoc on those industries and the economy as a whole. it's really hard to understate. something like every 100 illegals deported causes something like 18 jobs to be lost according to research from Iza based on Obama's radical deportations. (Obama's 1st and 2nd term both deported more than Trump's first term)

    i read an analysis by an economist the other day, the deportations alone could reduce lead to the GDP shrinking by something like 3%. keep in mind the housing crisis back in '08 led to a 2.4% decrease in GDP

    basically- if Trump actually goes through with his plans we're in for a long period of economic hardship that we haven't seen in half a century. and with it comes lots of radical movements because people will be angry and scared and the right wing is more than happy to throw fuel on the fire

    however.. maybe this is all sort of a show. Kind of like his last term with "the Wall". The wall was never meant to be built nor was it meant to accomplish anything. It was just a big theater for his base. An easy to understand symbol to point to. Trump supporters believe based on feeling and not on logic.

    of course, that could just be me being optimistic.

  • Bilingual people, when you were/if you are in school, did/do you ever talk to someone who speaks your language in that language so that the teachers won’t understand?

    Jump

  • portuguese. i was in the midwest as a child but moved to southern florida in the 2nd half of high school

  • Bilingual people, when you were/if you are in school, did/do you ever talk to someone who speaks your language in that language so that the teachers won’t understand?

    Jump

  • no. not many people spoke my native tongue.

    when i finally did move and found more people speaking the language, we would speak our language not to hide from the teacher but just because it was more comfortable

  • Can I lose a beer belly working out one day a week?

    Jump

  • if you stick to your workouts and train to failure, your muscles will grow.

    however to eliminate fat, you don't exercise. you eat less. when you are eating below caloric maintenance, your body makes up the difference in fat. you can't control where the fat comes from. you just have to maintain that for a long time and it'll go away. everyone stores fat differently. some in legs, some in stomach, etc.

    but you cannot exercise away body fat. it's like 80/20 diet exercise

  • Trump administration evicts former Coast Guard leader from her house with 3 hours notice

    Jump

  • yeah this is just the start. it's gonna get progressively worse until inevitably the system blows up. that could take decades. i'm guessing it culminates in some sort of unwinnable war

  • Netanyahu gifted Trump a golden pager during their meeting in Washington

    Jump

  • it shows how insane the country is becoming

    we're openly celebrating war crimes and ethnic cleansing

    like, before they would beat around the bush. you know the dog whistles. "anti-antisemitism" "self-defense" etc

    once the need for the mask is not so strong, the mask starts to slip

  • Why Mark Zuckerberg wants to redefine open source so badly

    Jump

  • It is defined legally in the EU

    https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/

    https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/high-level-summary/

    There are different requirements if the provider falls under "Free and open licence GPAI model providers"

    Which is legally defined in that piece of legislation

    otherwise companies will get the benefits of “open source” without doing the actual work.

    Meta has done a lot for Open source, to their credit. React Native is my preferred framework for mobile development, for example.

    Again- I fully acknowledge they are a large evil megacorp but without evil large megacorps we would not have Open Source as we know it today. There are certain realities we need to accept based on the system we live in. Open Source only exists because corporations benefit off of this shared infrastructure.

    Our laws should encourage this type of behavior and not restrict it. By limiting the scope, it gives Meta less incentive to open source the code behind their AI models. We want the opposite. We want to incentivize

  • Why Mark Zuckerberg wants to redefine open source so badly

    Jump

  • So this isn’t a new issue, and from my perspective not an issue at all. We just need to acknowledge that not all elements of a model may be open.

    This is more or less what Zuckerberg is asking of the EU. To acknowledge that parts of it cannot be opened. But the fact that the code is opened means it should qualify for certain benefits that open source products would qualify for.

  • Why Mark Zuckerberg wants to redefine open source so badly

    Jump

  • I agree with you. What I'm saying is that perhaps the law can differentiate between "not open source" "partially open source" and "fully open source"

    right now it's just the binary yes/no. which again determines whether or not millions of people would have access to something that could be useful to them

    i'm not saying change the definition of open source. i'm saying for legal purposes, in the EU, there should be some clarification in the law. if there is a financial benefit to having an open source product available then there should be something for having a partially open source product available

    especially a product that is as open source as it could possible legally be without violating copyright

  • Why Mark Zuckerberg wants to redefine open source so badly

    Jump

  • Yes, but that model would never compete with the models that use copyrighted data.

    There is a unfathomably large ocean of copyrighted data that goes into the modern LLMs. From scraping the internet to transcripts of movies and TV shows to tens of thousands of novels, etc.

    That's the reason they are useful. If it weren't for that data, it would be a novelty.

    So do we want public access to AI or not? How do we wanna do it? Zuck's quote from article "our legal framework isn't equipped for this new generation of AI" I think has truth to it

  • Why Mark Zuckerberg wants to redefine open source so badly

    Jump

  • This is essentially what Llama does, no? The reason they are attempting a clarification is because they would be subject to different regulations depending on whether or not it's open source.

    If they open source everything they legally can, then do they qualify as "open source" for legal purposes? The difference can be tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of dollars in the EU according to Meta.

    So a clarification on this issue, I think, is not asking for so much. Hate Facebook as much as the next guy but this is like 5 minute hate material

  • Why Mark Zuckerberg wants to redefine open source so badly

    Jump

  • when the data used to train the AI is copyrighted, how do you make it open source? it's a valid question.

    one thing is the model or the code that trains the AI. the other thing is the data that produces the weights which determines how the model predicts

    of course, the obligatory fuck meta and the zuck and all that but there is a legal conundrum here we need to address that don't fit into our current IP legal framework

    my preferred solution is just to eliminate IP entirely

  • Elon Musk Suggests Getting Rid Of All Regulations In Midnight Call

    Jump

  • immigration policies are federal regulations on the labor market. i say we open the borders

  • Is Elon Musk Staging a Coup? Billionaire Seizes Control at Treasury Dept.

    Jump

  • they won the election. now they are dismantling the levers of government. the goal is to weaken all other national institutions until eventually they can just ignore Congress or Supreme Court

  • Trudeau announces 25 per cent retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods starting Tuesday

    Jump

  • or is there some other narrative

    I believe a couple different things

    a) he's intentionally weakening the US economy to both weaken establishment institutions and spread mass discontent. he wants people nice and angry and fearful for the future. so when he takes more extreme actions later on, it doesn't seem as bad. also he's probably preparing for some sort of riot movement that includes political violence in the next couple years. as the establishment gets weaker, he'll be in a better position to essentially ignore them. so for example Supreme Court says something unconstitutional? Maybe he just ignores it and enforces his will regardless

    b) in the near future we may see a serious decoupling of the US economy from the world. maybe it's due a planned war or some other circumstance and this is in preparation for that. tariffs tend to cut off the economy from the outside world. it'll hurt less later on if we do some of it now

  • Trudeau announces 25 per cent retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods starting Tuesday

    Jump

  • Brother, your economy is getting gigafucked by Trump either way.

    If someone shoots at you, you don't shoot yourself in the foot to spite them. Canada is reliant on US trade. Cutting it off entirely would cause a serious economic shockwave that's hard to understate.