Police get caught running searches on their ex girlfriends. Police are barely better than gangs and they’re using sophisticated tech to fuck with their local communities. Brilliant. Add the CEO of Flock to the list of persona non grata.

That’s basically the AI definition given by DDG.

But nobody uses the phrase like that. When Reagan said he was draining the swamp, and his followers repeated the line, what do you think they said? Probably some shit like, “let’s make the government more efficient.”

Ok. Fine. That actually fits the phrase, even if Reagan was lying and giving corpos more control.

But 40 years later when you ask someone what they mean by “drain the swamp” and they express ideas of… imprisoning Democrats, getting rid of the big Jews, dismantling the liberal deep state.

People used “literally” sarcastically / for effect, and dictionaries added a new definition. So I think it’s fair to add a new definition for “drain the swamp” when people use it to mean “get rid of liberals.”

Vigilantes never had such big beautiful lists. Other presidents, other presidents, nuclear, other presidents never, and I was just saying, other presidents, because there are others, oh boy there are others, you don’t want to know about them though, but there are others, and I was saying, other presidents, look these are — I just shit my pants.

“If we assume X theorem is true, Y theorem is true, and lemma Z is true, then …”

This is actually about our models and seeing their incompleteness in a new light, right? I don’t think starting from arbitrary axioms and then trying to build reality was about proving qualities about reality. Or am I wrong? Just seems like they’re using “simulated reality” as a way to talk about our models for reality. By constructing a “silly” argument about how we can’t possibly be in a matrix, they’re revealing just how much we’re still missing.

Assume I read the article and then made a post.

It was a reddit post and a bunch of corpo news talking about the reddit post. Samsung didn’t trick anyone, the ML algorithms were always in the open, people just had to turn off the “scene optimizer” mode.

It definitely seems like it was a big thing but it’s hard to see if literally anything happened as a result or if anyone actually cared.

Republicans get higher bills but they know they’re on the right side, and so set to work building up the next link in the chain of lies.

Let’s watch as they create new lore. What surprising developments will come out, before becoming a thing every single one of them says they believe?

Today, XYZ has never touched the lips of a conservative. In one week, XYZ will be why they voted for whoever, whatever. XYZ will be a core belief championed by every true Republican.

I wonder what it means. If you search for music by Suicidal Tendencies then YouTube shows you a suicide hotline. What does it mean for OpenAI to say people are talking about suicide? They didn’t open up and read a million chats… they have automated detection and that is being triggered, which is not necessarily the same as people meaningfully discussing suicide.

It’s funny when you’re playing soccer and you’re locked in and then out of nowhere a player gets domed by the ball. Especially when you smoothly recover like you meant to rocket the ball off the defenders head.

I get looking at terrorism as a simple data point and then saying left wing terrorism is on the rise. When there’s more violence then it’s indicative of underlying problems.

But most of the time the conversation implies people need to clean up their act. Politicians must stop using charged language. People must chill out.

In that vein, I’m curious how much left wing violence is real. When people are getting shot down for trying to get abortions, getting put on lists…

That’s like playing half a chord progression.

But when you fight back, that’s also a terrorism. Hitting the bully is still violence, and can’t we all just chill?? Lmao

Male wolf spiders may hang back and watch mating pairs from the shadows, learning how to successfully attract a mate. Just like us fr

It’s googles but with kagi.com, a search engine

If groceries cost us $500 per month and our government says it accepted $10 from an anonymous donor to help pay for next months groceries, what does it mean?

Like what just happened? Did they just make a joke / are they fucking with people?

Are they only funding their gestapo? Are they strategically activating specific personnel via a check, and ignoring less critical or more motivated soldiers?

It’s as if someone threw some coins at the crowd just for a chance to talk about how it’s the Democrats who “opted” not to pay them. I wish they more deliberately explored the “it costs billions to pay the military yet the 130 million is gonna do… something” part of the story.

I’d take the $1000 and then pay someone $100 to tell me I’m beautiful.

Hegseth has shitty tattoos but we talk about him leaking chats, shit policy, chastising the troops, being a sloppy drunk. Lots of REAL reasons to dislike Hegseth.

But this guy… people just bring up his tattoos?

The Donald J Trump Raped Children Ballroom. Or just “the ballroom” if you’re into the whole brevity thing. (Who the hell would ever use the “full” name?)

Even though corporations play with labels, I still think of it as “this single food item is not a substitute for a meal.”

But it’s silly to assume people will split most of this crap. It’s not like a bag of chips you can roll up for later, it’s molten-frozen astronaut food.

What does it mean for cops to arrest paramilitary?

It sounds like it will be many contests: who can shout louder and bring more guns to bear? Who gets confused first, who gets shot first?

It’s a bunch of barely trained cops who can hardly handle policing armed citizens and now they’re gonna handle ICE? They’ll need to be careful and deliberate.

Where does the meaning come from? God? Are we in a video game where someone programmed words to have specific meaning? I never understood where the root authority comes from. Many people are using Nazi to describe fascists but if you can’t derive meaning from how people use words… where does the authority come from?

That’s a great question!

I do indeed read my posts back—how else would I proofread them? 🤖