Presidents are above the law while they’re in office. This case is unique because it happened before he was in office. The message that will really be sent is “wait until you’re actually president to do would-be illegal shit”.
Still worth handing him a harsh sentence, just to put the orange fascist fuck behind bars, but there shouldn’t be any misconceptions about some true notion of justice here. Trump is just a moron, and didn’t know how to play the game correctly.
Any chance you have an nvidia card? Nvidia for a long time has been in a worse spot on Linux than AMD, which interestingly is the inverse of Windows. A lot of AMD users complain of driver issues on Windows and swap to Nvidia as a result, and the exact opposite happens on Linux.
Nvidia is getting much better on Linux though, and Wayland+explicit sync is coming down the pipeline. With NVK in a couple years it’s quite possible that nvidia/amd Linux experience will be very similar.
“they can’t learn anything” is too reductive. Try feeding GPT4 a language specification for a language that didn’t exist at the time of its training, and then tell it to program in that language given a library that you give it.
It won’t do well, but neither would a junior developer in raw vim/nano without compiler/linter feedback. It will roughly construct something that looks like that new language you fed it that it wasn’t trained on. This is something that in theory LLMs can do well, so GPT5/6/etc. will do better, perhaps as well as any professional human programmer.
Their context windows have increased many times over. We’re no longer operating in the 4/8k range, but instead 128k->1024k range. That’s enough context to, from the perspective of an observer, learn an entirely new language, framework, and then write something almost usable in it. And 2024 isn’t the end for context window size.
With the right tools (e.g input compiler errors and have the LLM reflect on how to fix said compiler errors), you’d get even more reliability, with just modern day LLMs. Get something more reliable, and effectively it’ll do what we can do by learning.
So much work in programming isn’t novel. You’re not making something really new, but instead piecing together work other people did. Even when you make an entirely new library, it’s using a language someone else wrote, libraries other people wrote, in an editor someone else wrote, on an O.S someone else wrote. We’re all standing on the shoulders of giants.
18 months ago, chatgpt didn’t exist. GPT3.5 wasn’t publicly available.
At that same point 18 months ago, iPhone 14 was available. Now we have the iPhone 15.
People are used to LLMs/AI developing much faster, but you really have to keep in perspective how different this tech was 18 months ago. Comparing LLM and smartphone plateaus is just silly at the moment.
Yes they’ve been refining the GPT4 model for about a year now, but we’ve also got major competitors in the space that didn’t exist 12 months ago. We got multimodality that didn’t exist 12 months ago. Sora is mind bogglingly realistic; didn’t exist 12 months ago.
GPT5 is just a few months away. If 4->5 is anything like 3->4, my career as a programmer will be over in the next 5 years. GPT4 already consistently outperforms college students that I help, and can often match junior developers in terms of reliability (though with far more confidence, which is problematic obviously). I don’t think people realize how big of a deal that is.
825,000 chickens per year in the U.S are accidentally boiled alive or drowned before their intended slaughter. https://animalclock.org/ this isn’t prevented because prevention mechanisms cost money, as in they eat into profits.
It’s standard practice for male pigs to have their tails and testicles ripped out without pain relief https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/23817808/pig-farm-investigation-feedback-immunity-feces-intestines this link also showcases how people abuse pigs for fun. Objectifying animals you kill is a coping mechanism for humans, engaging in that much killing is unnatural and unhealthy for humans, it also leads to vastly higher rates of domestic violence and crime, as it normalizes violence as a solution.
It’s normal for foxes to have their skin ripped off while they’re alive. Animals have their beaks ripped off so they can’t kill each other in distress, as they go literally insane, abandon normal social hierarchies, and start simply trying to kill each other given the lack of space. http://www.nationearth.com/
I understand ignorance of how horrible the conditions are is a normal part of how humans justify our atrocities. However what always baffles me is people who appear genuinely concerned about animal welfare can be so absurdly uninformed on the practices that they directly support with their purchases, while criticizing practices that you have absolutely no influence over in a place on the other side of the planet.
What’s the cat abuse situation over there? Is it worse than our pig/cow/chicken abuse situation?
There’s a misconception among western intellectuals that emotion and intellect are juxtaposed, that your indifference towards the genocide that is taking place is somehow a virtue. It’s not. It’s your inability to actually comprehend what is going on. If you lived the life of a Palestinian you wouldn’t just be mad, you’d be fucking helpless, and your inability to internalize that and have it impact your view on the world is a common human failing.
If the bombs Israel purposefully dropped on civilians killed someone you cared about, you wouldn’t be on here arguing against people who use the word genocide. People you yourself admit aren’t actually saying anything wrong. You’re trying to move people who are literally just stating facts about the world in an emotionally charged way away from intense language. To what end? Do you actually care? Probably not.
You should develop some empathy. It’s not a weakness.
First time using Wikipedia? There are actually a dozen resources at the bottom. Use those.
Anyway, you didn’t address anything I actually said. You sit back as Israel invades, bombs, and slaughters thousands upon thousands of children for the purposes of wiping out a native people, and you argue about the semantics of genocide. It’s so fucking pathetic, people did the same thing during the Holocaust to try to argue against U.S intervention and it fucking worked, the only reason we intervened was Japan bombing pearl harbor.
Genocide apologists like yourself should go spend a day actually experiencing the fucking genocide, then maybe you’ll have an ounce of compassion. It just sucks having you out here, potentially changing public sentiment away from helping those being genocided. The difference between an indifferent bystander and a genocide enabler is not as large as you’d probably imagine, being the former yourself.
Yeah, want to know why the international community doesn’t call the Palestinian genocide a genocide? Because Israel and the U.S reject it lmfao. You’re such a fucking bootlicker.
The only half-coherent argument that some academics make against the genocide classification is that it’s instead an ethnic cleansing. Nobody (except the U.S and Israel) thinks Israel isn’t trying to exterminate the natives.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_genocide_accusation
Yeah, there are some leftists that try drawing the line at silly points like “oh I won’t vote for someone who supports genocide” but really what’s the big deal? Genocides happen, I think they’re kind of fun sounding. I’m thinking about moving to Israel and helping the IDF finish their extermination of the barbaric “human animals”/natives that have infested their holy land. Biden has self-identified as a Zionist many times before, and I think that’s a beautiful thing. I bet he’d take up arms with me against the parasites if he was still fully sentient. He’s definitely trying his best as president to help them finish cleaning up the trash.
Oh, and yeah only Trump is a fascist. None of the above sounds anything like fascism, don’t worry.
/s
Depends on what you’re looking for. I had a high paying tech job (layoffs op), and I wanted a fun car that accelerates fast but also is a good daily driver. I was in the ~60k price range, so I was looking at things like the Corvette Stingray, but there are too many compromises for that car in terms of daily driving.
The Model 3 accelerates faster 0-30, and the same speed 0-60. Off the line it feels way snappier and responsive because it’s electric, and the battery makes its center of gravity lower, so it’s remarkably good at cornering for a sedan, being more comparable to a sports car in terms of cornering capabilities than a sedan.
Those aren’t normally considerations for people trying to find a good value commuter car, so you would literally just ignore all those advantages. Yet people don’t criticize Corvette owners for not choosing a Hyundai lol
On the daily driving front, Tesla wins out massively over other high performance cars in that price range. Being able to charge up at home, never going to a gas station, best in class driving automation/assistance software, simple interior with good control panel software, one pedal driving with regen breaking.
If you’re in the 40k price range for a daily commuter, your criteria will be totally different, and I am not well versed enough in the normal considerations of that price tier and category to speak confidently to what’s the best value. Tesla does however, at the very least, have a niche in the high performance sedan market.
Like sure fuck Elon, but why do you think FSD is unsafe? They publish the accident rate, it’s lower than the national average.
There are times where it will fuck up, I’ve experienced this. However there are times where it sees something I physically can’t because of either blindspots or pillars in the car.
Having the car drive and you intervene is statistically safer than the national average. You could argue the inverse is better (you drive and the car intervenes), but I’d argue that system would be far worse, as you’d be relinquishing final say to the computer and we don’t have a legal system setup for that, regardless of how good the software is (e.g you’re still responsible as the driver).
You can call it a marketing term, but in reality it can and does successfully drive point to point with no interventions normally. The places it does fuckup are consistent fuckups (e.g bad road markings that convey the wrong thing, and you only know because you’ve been on that road thousands of times). It’s not human, but it’s far more consistent than a human, in both the ways it succeeds and fails. If you learn these patterns you can spend more time paying attention to what other drivers are doing and novel things that might be dangerous (people, animals, etc ) and less time on trivial things like mechanically staying inside of two lines or adjusting your speed. Looking in your blindspot or to the side isn’t nearly as dangerous for example, so you can get more information.
You missed the forest for the trees. He failed to get this passed. It’s absolutely fluff to reach to Biden’s failures in a list of his greatest accomplishments.
Obviously I agree on decriminalizing marijuana, but that’s not what my comment or the broader discussion was about.
I don’t know if you genuinely missed the point of my comment, or if you’re just arguing in bad faith.
If your goal is to reinforce the pro-Biden crowd, good job. If your goal is to convince anyone who is anti-Biden, this won’t do.
Fluff has opposite effects for people with different biases. Someone with a bias in favor of what you’re saying reads all the fluff as “yup this is a metric fuckload of facts that weighs in favor of my heuristical understanding of the world”, while others would read it as “this person is obviously reaching and fluffing up the pro-Biden rhetoric, so is any of it impressive?”
I’ll be more concrete in my criticism, you mention both the climate action (materially important and good to mention) and also his failed attempt to pass marijuana legislation. Even bringing up marijuana legislation when the kinds of discussions we’re having are about genocide, climate change, employment, etc. seems out of place, but you bring up a failed attempt to do this comparatively extremely unimportant thing, it reads as you having an immense bias and reaching for anything you can. Same thing with his failure to get proper student loan relief to people.
Essentially the only actual legitimate win he has is the passing of the climate action. Wage growth and unemployment shrinking are parts of natural boom bust cycles, not any executive orders he’s put in place or action signed into law by Democrats.
For what it’s worth I’m not a moderate, I’m a socialist, so I’m not normally the “truth is in the middle of two positions” type of person, but your comment is the exception to the rule, where you’re not spewing out just straight falsehoods but you do have an obvious bias and are fluffing up his achievements more than deserved.
Reducing net profit doesn’t have any impact on pricing in capitalist markets. It’s not like capitalists have some specific profit percentage they are allowed to hit (unless they’re in a very regulated industry like grid or water supply). They want infinite returns, and they’ll increase prices as much as the market allows to generate more profits.
Capitalists don’t look at a net profit of 4.4% and say “yup that’s enough”, but if it were 2.8% they’d say “damn guess we have to increase prices for customers, I really wish we didn’t have to do this”.
They might increase prices as a retaliatory measure. The same way businesses slashed hours as a result of Obamacare. They didn’t have to, but it benefited them to, and they didn’t see a downside.
They might be able to increase prices, blame it on this law, and have people who are aligned politically with them put up with it and maybe even support their business more to “stick it to the libs”. They already do this with things like inflation, blaming it on Biden and then increasing prices far more than necessary.
Democrats won’t respond to a bunch of uncommitted voters beyond just lip service. The genocide will continue, fiscal conservative austerity politics will continue. The best we’ll get is a return to the world of 2015. That’s the absolute best case with another Biden term, and even that is unlikely.
I know the genocide isn’t a big deal for you or other moderate libs, and you’re more concerned with getting America back to its status quo than doing anything that might actually help Palestinians in the future.
The Democratic party caters to mainstream voters
The Democratic party caters to power. They want to stay in power. If enough people vote green who previously voted Democrat, they know there’s something that moved them that way, and they’ll know that some of those voters can be recaptured. You have an incredibly naive and rosey view of bourgoise democracy.
It’s not easier to pull a Trump cultist who has been voting Republican for 40 years, over a person who voted Democrat in 2020 and Green in 2024. It’s quite easy to reason out, and even if you don’t understand this simple fact, Democrats in 2028 will at least, because it’s essentially their full time job to maintain power.
Exactly like you said, it’s not about an idealist movement towards progressivism, that’s exactly why the feedback loop isn’t an issue. When certain material goals are met, progressives are satisfied. It’s not an endless pit of progressive ideals, it’s about actual changes we want to see in Democrat policy. Once those changes are made, we vote Democrat to reinforce good behavior.
The feedback loop spoiler idea only works if there are literally no material goals, only an idealist goal to move towards progressivism. This isn’t how reality works.
Not supporting genocide is a large material goal, and the Israel/Palestine conflict wasn’t at the worst it’s ever been in 2020, but it is in 2024. The material goals changed. In 2020 the biggest issue I was aware of was stopping fascism in America. Now that doesn’t even come close to stopping the ramped up genocide, that happened as a direct result of the endorsement of Israel by the Biden administration.
I would vote for a Democratic candidate that wants to end the genocide. Sure, they can still be a corporate boot-licking liberal. Biden was in 2020 and I still voted for him because the material outcome I wanted was satisfied.
It is not satisfied in 2024. The Palestinian genocide is far more important now, as it’s happening literally faster than any time in history. You claim that leftists have some idealist goal to just move Democrats to the left, so a refusal to engage with these leftists is the only option Democrats have, but this ignores a massive difference between socialists and fascists, socialists are materialists and fascists are idealists.
It’s a disingenuous portrayal of how leftists actually think. I suspect you’re conflating socialist thought with fascist thought either because you’re a liberal or because you’re unfamiliar with socialist theory. Either way, it’s worth getting more educated, the extreme left does not function the same way the extreme right does, and you seem to think it does.
The difference between someone who doesn’t vote and someone who voted Democrat in 2020 and Green in 2024 is you know two facts about the latter person that you don’t know about the former:
they are willing to vote Democrat in some circumstances
they prefer far left policies
You can play dumb all you want and pretend these facts aren’t true, but that doesn’t change the reality of the situation, no matter how many words you write to overcomplicate the issue.
I don’t think the person you’re responding to is a Trump supporter. I think they’re critiquing the vast amounts of political energy people put into supporting and justifying a genocidal state and its leaders.
Your entire comment exemplifies this perfectly. There’s obviously a lot of time and effort you’ve put into forming your electoral views, and you obviously spend a good deal of time going around, at the very least online, trying to inform people how to make better decisions inside the electoral sphere.
This is exactly what electoralism tries to drive in people. The expenditure of political capital within acceptable bounds. Before electoralism/liberal democracies, political capital accumulated and was then spent on strikes, riots, or revolutions. Things that are much more effective at driving change per political capital spent.
There are literally millions of people like you in America that could all immediately stop all your expenditure of political capital and it would make actually no material difference. That’s a beautiful thing about electoralism (for those in power), the thing that matters is the differential, not the total expenditure. This is why “swing states” exist.
I’ll put it into concrete terms, imagine the amount of electorally active individuals in America was immediately cut in half. The population remains the same, but exactly half of the current voting population stops voting. Assume all ratios remain the same. There’d be fundamentally no difference in material outcomes.
Now imagine if all current political capital was spent towards strikes, unions, revolution, or really any form of politics outside electoralism. Doubling or halfing this engagement would be massive. Real material outcomes would be different if there were thousands more strikes. What doesn’t matter is if the voting population is 150 million, 90 million, or 10 million. Only the differential matters, and only for determining a fixed binary outcome.