|
Mellow Seas posted:If Trump somehow lost the primary for non-incapacitation reasons it would be really, really interesting to see how he treats the actual nominee. He would say it was rigged, he was cheated, the RNC ratfucked him (and he would 100% call it that in his insane not-tweets), and call his followers to boycott the election or to write in his name. R turnout would absolutely crater and the dems would sweep. The Republicans know this, which is why he's going to be the nominee, unless he's dead. Even if he's dead, he still might win; his base isn't real good with empirical evidence. Then when they give the nominee to someone else R turnout *still* craters, because they're not voting for mask-on Republicans anymore. By the Gods, that would be funny. Trump croaks, wins the nomination anyway and R turnout craters when it turns out a dead man can't run for president.
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 22:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 16:36 |
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:I wonder if there'll be any attempt at an operation ratfuck against Trump during the primaries, given that Dems seem more worried about him than other GOP candidates, even though some national head-to-heads show DeSantis vs. Biden pretty close to Trump vs. Biden results (ie: pretty much a tie). My worthless two cents are that Desantis would be a worse general candidate than Trump but if the GOP leadership and Murdoch cannot make Desantis the candidate no amount of ratfuckery will even move the needle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 22:17
|
|
|
Fork of Unknown Origins posted:He’s been recorded talking about sexually harassing women, lost civil trials, and is under indictment for several crimes with likely several more coming. What could an operation ratfuck even look like? It would look like Dems voting in GOP primaries against Trump, whom GOP voters overwhelmingly support, just as Dems played up DeSantis's chances before he started tanking in the polls. That was the meaning of the "operation ratfuck," popularized by Limbaugh when he tried to get GOP voters to cross over & support Hillary once McCain was a lock. GOP voters know all the things you've mentioned & aren't phased a whit, just as most Dem voters didn't want Biden to run for reelection & doubt his mental fitness for office & yet still support him overwhelmingly. eta: Do people itt still think Trump has a possibility of losing to DeSantis? The post at the top of this page, as well as its quoted text, is what led me to ask. Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Jul 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 22:19
|
|
|
Tiny Timbs posted:These new tools are helping me cut down on the "more work," because fussing with Excel and writing Python are only incidental to the actual work I'm meant to be doing. I'm not going to protest by being that guy who spends 20 years building spreadsheets by typing numbers into a Word doc and carefully copy and pasting them into Excel one-by-one. Okay, that's fine with your specific situation but do you not think about the consequences for others? It's not about halting progress for potentially beneficial new tech, it's about the fact that we as a society and especially our government are not capable of reacting to these things quickly enough to offer help for the many many people who will find themselves overworked, underpaid, or laid off as a result of those technologies. And corporations will be lobbying against any sort of worker protections or safety net measures because it helps them put downward pressure on wages and labor in general. e: you also sound about as confident as everyone else who was indispensable and well-compensated until they weren't
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 22:22
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:It would look like Dems voting in GOP primaries against Trump, whom GOP voters overwhelmingly support, just as Dems played up DeSantis's chances before he started tanking in the polls. That was the meaning of the "operation ratfuck," popularized by Limbaugh when he tried to get GOP voters to cross over & support Hillary once McCain was a lock. Ah, got you. I thought you meant like a surprise revelation because yeah your second paragraph is completely true. Trump is the nominee if he’s alive.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 22:24
|
|
|
Is anyone else low key starting to panic? It seems like almost a given now that trump will be the nominee again, then all it takes is a minor slip up by biden or a recession and trump is president again and there goes the country for good. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 22:42
|
|
|
pencilhands posted:Is anyone else low key starting to panic? It seems like almost a given now that trump will be the nominee again, then all it takes is a minor slip up by biden or a recession and trump is president again and there goes the country for good. It’s been kind of a low level panic for like 7 years now. Use the panic for action. Phone bank or canvass or anything. At least that stuff helps me feel less out of control.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 22:51
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:eta: Do people itt still think Trump has a possibility of losing to DeSantis? The post at the top of this page, as well as its quoted text, is what led me to ask. pencilhands posted:Is anyone else low key starting to panic? It seems like almost a given now that trump will be the nominee again, then all it takes is a minor slip up by biden or a recession and trump is president again and there goes the country for good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 22:52
|
|
|
pencilhands posted:Is anyone else low key starting to panic? It seems like almost a given now that trump will be the nominee again, then all it takes is a minor slip up by biden or a recession and trump is president again and there goes the country for good. Had a change of heart?  pencilhands posted:I’ll be proudly voting for Trump next year.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 22:56
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:Had a change of heart? Yes, I learned my lesson from my well deserved probation
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 23:05
|
|
|
Professor Beetus posted:e: you also sound about as confident as everyone else who was indispensable and well-compensated until they weren't You sure are reading a lot into what I said. How is a worker supposed to protest having access to a tool? I’m aware of the issues professions have with different applications of it. I’m aware that anything that makes my life easier means my labor is easier to replace. And? I could ignore it, but I’d be worse at my job and more stressed. If it were any other type of software product I’d ask my management to get me a license. Tiny Timbs fucked around with this message at 23:39 on Jul 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 23:28
|
|
|
pencilhands posted:Is anyone else low key starting to panic? It seems like almost a given now that trump will be the nominee again, then all it takes is a minor slip up by biden or a recession and trump is president again and there goes the country for good. I'd recommend that you stop reading politics stuff on the internet for the next six months. It's July 2023, there's literally no reason to be having panic attacks about the 2024 election yet. That's a sure sign that you need to stop doomscrolling, stop watching the horserace coverage, and log the gently caress off.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 23:35
|
|
|
Tiny Timbs posted:You sure are reading a lot into what I said. I don't expect you to do anything, but you invited this criticism when you casually dismissed the very well founded fears of people who are facing down serious threats to their livelihood in a country with essentially zero safety net that frequently sides with the entities choosing to gently caress over their labor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 23:41
|
|
|
Professor Beetus posted:I don't expect you to do anything, but you invited this criticism when you casually dismissed the very well founded fears of people who are facing down serious threats to their livelihood in a country with essentially zero safety net that frequently sides with the entities choosing to gently caress over their labor. Where is the dismissal?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 23:42
|
|
|
Professor Beetus posted:I don't expect you to do anything, but you invited this criticism when you casually dismissed the very well founded fears of people who are facing down serious threats to their livelihood in a country with essentially zero safety net that frequently sides with the entities choosing to gently caress over their labor. I didn’t dismiss their fears. They are well founded within the profession.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 23:46
|
|
|
Tiny Timbs posted:I didn’t dismiss their fears. They are well founded within the profession. mawarannahr posted:Where is the dismissal? Tiny Timbs posted:I use it every day to save me tons of time on Python and Excel scripts. People generically ranting against AI are missing that the issue is certain applications, and even generating people with a dozen fingers isn’t a problem if you’re not going straight to the art version of prod. This seemed pretty dismissive to me but if it wasn't intended that way I apologize. e: the issue for me is that we don't have a government competent enough to respond to these tech advances, and companies that use AI as a basis to gently caress over their labor aren't going to be held accountable. Quite the opposite, they will be rewarded for fulfilling their fiduciary duty and making sure that labor doesn't start demanding too much from their betters. Professor Beetus fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Jul 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 23:51
|
|
|
Professor Beetus posted:This seemed pretty dismissive to me but if it wasn't intended that way I apologize. That's not how I read it. I took it more to be critical of folks being dismissive of the threat, ie "it's never gonna work, LLMs can't do anything right, there's no way it's ever going to write a movie script or a story, it can't scale, the programs are broken" etc when this stuff's only been generally available for like a year, is replacing jobs, and is changing how people do them already.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 23:54
|
|
|
There’s that, but I’m mostly pointing out that the threat of AI isn’t felt evenly and I don’t just mean for the people who directly profit off of AI.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2023 23:56
|
|
|
Tiny Timbs posted:There’s that, but I’m mostly pointing out that the threat of AI isn’t felt evenly 100%, I went back to school a while back when it became clear the writing was on the wall for translation; others with established careers were not so lucky. If you asked in 2010 I would have ridiculed the idea of even passable machine translation for my language pair. The sense of immunity came because of the assumption that since computers don't understand the world, they cannot produce a passable translation -- but it turns out they're good enough for people who would be paying you instead.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 00:03
|
|
|
Thanks for responding in good faith and I appreciate the clarifications, I am in agreement with all that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 00:08
|
|
|
On the subject of AI, one thing we haven't seen yet is misapplication of AI (or an AI simply being wrong) and costing a company a ton of money - to my knowledge, anyway. The closest thing I can think of is Tesla getting sued over a FSD car causing a crash, and Tesla won the suit. But there will be both consumer and corporate financial harm as less tested, more closed off systems are implemented. I don't know what the outcome will be, but if it's, say, General Motors suing Microsoft because Microsoft implemented a solution that absolutely kills their business - even for a day - that will raise a lot of eyebrows.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 00:59
|
|
|
It would be quite the comedy to see a Failson AI fail upwards and get promoted.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 01:02
|
|
|
pencilhands posted:Is anyone else low key starting to panic? It seems like almost a given now that trump will be the nominee again, then all it takes is a minor slip up by biden or a recession and trump is president again and there goes the country for good. There's no need for panic. Trump isn't some unique harbinger of the endtimes like the Twitter Libs have convinced themselves. The biggest difference between him and any other lovely Republican career politician is that Trump won't use the party dogwhistle. If he'd quit saying the quiet parts out loud, there wouldn't be nearly as much panic over how he's going to call forth a thousand years of darkness. Yeah, a second Trump presidency would suck terribly, but it isn't the end of democracy 5-ever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 01:20
|
|
|
the_steve posted:Yeah, a second Trump presidency would suck terribly, but it isn't the end of democracy 5-ever. He tried to overturn the 2020 election and has "joked" that he shouldn't be held to term limits because of the Mueller investigation to raucous applause. It's very unlikely to actually happen, but Trump and the current Republican party are not a group of people that respect norms of our democracy. ryde fucked around with this message at 01:25 on Jul 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 01:21
|
|
|
the_steve posted:There's no need for panic. The single biggest systemic threat of Trump is, in my opinion, how much he has focused on voter fraud, fake ballots, etc. We can survive a crimelord President - but damaging one of the very underpinnings of Democracy is wildly destructive, and far too many people have latched onto it. Politicians have try to gerrymander and pass voter ID laws as long as I've been able to vote. I can't remember anyone focusing on it at a national level the way Trump did, and it's putting some major strain on our electoral system.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 01:25
|
|
|
ryde posted:He tried to overturn the 2020 election and has "joked" that he shouldn't be held to term limits because of the Mueller investigation to raucous applause. It's very unlikely to actually happen, but Trump and the current Republican party are not a group of people that respect norms of our democracy. Do you consider donor-driven politics & regulatory capture less of "a threat to democracy" than Trump becoming president? Because those are both respected norms of our democracy but imo have had & will continue to have a far more harmful effect on our country & its government processes than what happened on Jan. 6 or by anything Trump has done or said. eta: Shooting Blanks posted:The single biggest systemic threat of Trump is, in my opinion, how much he has focused on voter fraud, fake ballots, etc. We can survive a crimelord President - but damaging one of the very underpinnings of Democracy is wildly destructive, and far too many people have latched onto it. An interesting result from the Gallup poll over the last three elections:  Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 01:42 on Jul 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 01:39
|
|
|
the_steve posted:There's no need for panic. I don't necessarily disagree that the other Republican candidates would be around as bad as Trump, I just think that it still would be catastrophic even if it was "just" DeSantis. Not only would he push to gently caress over the LGBTQ+ community even more than they already have been by the Supreme Court, he would be on a crusade against "woke" companies and absolutely gut all of the agencies all over again - having only 4 years for the administrative state to recover is really bad, especially as we are getting to the point where climate change has cascading effects. DeSantis is every bit as venal and petty as Trump, but he also has motivation beyond personal enrichment, which makes him more likely to chase down goals that Trump didn't have the follow-through to pursue. All of that said, the House and Senate are more important for a bunch of things, so whether it is Trump or DeSantis the real thing we are worried about is an R trifecta
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 01:40
|
|
|
the_steve posted:There's no need for panic. He incited a mob to attack the capitol in an attempt to overturn the results of an election. He asked state officials to find non-existent votes in order to overturn the results of an election. I'm not sure how you can look at these facts and say that Trump is no more a threat to Democracy than previous Republican presidents.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 01:47
|
|
|
Yeah the Republican president directly preceding him would NEVER undemocratically overturn an election
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 01:52
|
|
|
I've been thinking about this SCOTUS decision about certain businesses being allowed to deny service and, at the risk of a probe, I got to thinking about it and want to play devil's advocate here for a moment. I'm an illustrator and a graphic designer by trade but am mostly down to freelance work in that area. I have refused work for Republican political flyers, anti abortion stuff, and certain churches that I very much do not align with. Things I actively believe are doing harm to our society and that I do not wish to lend my talent and skills to. Am I allowed to do that legally? I think I am. So, turning this argument on its head, when am I, as a creator, allowed to say "no, I don't want your business?" and I wonder where that line is drawn? I'm not a business owner but I do OK illustrating and doing graphics or print work for some clients I like. Suppose an anti gay, gun nut, nazi adjacent group or something like that saw my work and wanted me to drum up some logos, signs or pamphlets for them and I refused the work? Should I be forced to do that? I know there's an area there where poo poo like refusing to serve black people in restaurants or denying women access to wherever is a clear violation of civil rights, but when can I refuse work as an artist? The cake baking lady was a scummy piece of poo poo but I'm not sure she should be forced to bake it. What if some weirdo wants me to a Deviant Art illustration that I'm not comfortable with? I have to dig more into it but is it possible the Supreme Court got this one right? I don't want to be on a legal hook for turning down a catalog for military grade police weaponry, which I have had work on at one of my jobs, and I view that one as different since I was in the employ of someone else. But if they'd come to me as a 1099 worker I'd tell them to get lost. What if someone wants me to illustrate a "Why Jesus Hates Gay People" comic book and I say no? I've done some christian driven children's book illustrations but that was my choice and the writing was pretty benign. Isn't the better way for the customer to say "gently caress you then, I don't want you to bake my cake", let everyone know they're bigots and for businesses to openly market and advertise as being "hate free" or whatever? I'm not real comfortable with the idea of being legally forced to design the printed program for next year's CPAC convention or banners, billboards and signs promoting it or poo poo like that. BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 01:56 on Jul 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 01:54
|
|
|
I still don't quite understand how quickly GWB's rep was rehabilitated, given the invective with which he was regarded by Democrats for a decade & beyond. It had to be more than sharing lozenges with Michelle Obama, although I thought his post-presidential paintings were sort of endearing in a weird way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 01:56
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:I still don't quite understand how quickly GWB's rep was rehabilitated, given the invective with which he was regarded by Democrats for a decade & beyond.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 01:58
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I've been thinking about this SCOTUS decision about certain businesses being allowed to deny service and, at the risk of a probe, I got to thinking about it and want to play devil's advocate here for a moment. Former dnd mod McCaine shared some similar thoughts via his Twitter after the ruling. I appreciate your willingness to see the decision objectively and in light of unintended consequences, bc that seems to be a rarer trait these days among the prevalence of sorted/segregated echo chambers. It's something I've pointed out in light of the disclosures about government interference in protected speech.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 02:01
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I've been thinking about this SCOTUS decision about certain businesses being allowed to deny service and, at the risk of a probe, I got to thinking about it and want to play devil's advocate here for a moment. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 02:02
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:I still don't quite understand how quickly GWB's rep was rehabilitated, given the invective with which he was regarded by Democrats for a decade & beyond. It probably has a lot to do with the fact he is not an rear end in a top hat and has kept his nose out of any public politics since he left office. Overall, he’s been pretty inoffensive as an ex-president.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 02:02
|
|
|
Jesus I really hate today's news emphasis on "did Trump actually believe he had lost the election or not?" Even if he was totally convinced in his maniacal deluded brain that he'd won, it's just as loving criminal for him to try and seize power as if he didn't believe it, since he LOST. It's an angle that makes it real easy to give Trump some kind of deniability on the whole thing that he is in no way entitled to.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 02:03
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:He incited a mob to attack the capitol in an attempt to overturn the results of an election. Well for starters, he's old as balls and probably has the sort of McDonalds and Hot Pocket diet that would make any goon proud. Even with access to the best medical care on the planet like he has, he's not going to live forever. Secondly, to your two examples: So what? I ask that in all objective earnesty. What were the actual real-world odds that either of those things would have worked? Not "Haha, zero because they failed", but the actual chances of success? By what mechanism? Had the Jan. 6 people actually gotten into the chambers, was there some magic gavel they could steal that would let them declare Trump the winner? Stand within the AoE radius of a Blue flag until it turned Red? Force Pelosi to say that Trump won? How would they enforce that? Would the Jan 6 crew stick around until the 20th just to make sure Nancy's pinky-promise held true? And they wouldn't somehow be taken out by snipers or just plain old overwhelming force in the meantime? At no point on 1/6 was there a realistic path to victory for them, so I fail to see how he was any sort of effective threat on that front. Same thing with the second point. So what? Some fresh-faced intern runs into the building with a lockbox full of notecards that said "Trump" on them. Would they have actually held up under any sort of scrutiny? Or would they have been sued back into nonexistence and thrown out like they were a petition for Green party ballot access? Fabricating hundreds of thousands of falsified votes wouldn't have been something pulled off on a spur of the moment, not with any expectation of success. It was useless desperation at best, the evil emperor screaming "No! This is impossible!" in impotent fury as the end nears, not an indication of any actual threat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 02:04
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:Jesus I really hate today's news emphasis on "did Trump actually believe he had lost the election or not?" What news emphasis? Are you talking about particular news stories & if so, can you link them?
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 02:09
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:On the subject of AI, one thing we haven't seen yet is misapplication of AI (or an AI simply being wrong) and costing a company a ton of money - to my knowledge, anyway. The closest thing I can think of is Tesla getting sued over a FSD car causing a crash, and Tesla won the suit. But there will be both consumer and corporate financial harm as less tested, more closed off systems are implemented. Well, there was that lawyer who tried to use raw ChatGPT output to write court documents in defense of a client, and of course ChatGPT made up and cited non-existent cases, and when the opposing council and judge pointed this out the lawyer just insisted "no they're totally real cases, you must just not be looking hard enough, I'm using this super-powerful new search engine to find them." https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/06/lawyers-have-real-bad-day-in-court-after-citing-fake-cases-made-up-by-chatgpt/ The judge fined the lawyer and made them write personal notifications to all the judges who ChatGPT suggested wrote the fake court cases it cited.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 02:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 16:36 |
|
|
pencilhands posted:Yeah the Republican president directly preceding him would NEVER undemocratically overturn an election You're conflating a Supreme Court decision, however wrong, to an attempt at a violent coup. They are not the same. There was genuine uncertainty about the actual outcome of the election for quite a while. The 2020 election was incredibly clear cut in comparison. Willa Rogers posted:I still don't quite understand how quickly GWB's rep was rehabilitated, given the invective with which he was regarded by Democrats for a decade & beyond. I think it's the aw-shucks attitude and "I'd have a beer with him" sentiment that always existed coloured by nostalgia, him being out of the spotlight for a long time, lingering good will from post-911 among the olds, and Trump being a worst and more recent example that makes him look better in comparison. the_steve posted:Secondly, to your two examples: So what? I ask that in all objective earnesty. Either one of them would have been enough to get the election in front of the Supreme Court, which had already been skewed horribly. Given how they have ruled on other topics, I don't think they'd hesitate to find a reason to keep Trump in power. I don't have as much faith in American democratic institutions as you do, I guess. DeadlyMuffin fucked around with this message at 02:30 on Jul 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 02:13
|
|