Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine #votebluenomatterwhat are you having fun al? are you having van al? gaolang > your fav imagine thinking trump is the good guy is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? it's over for trump life goal sister harem loli mfw kamala harris can actually win real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you worst thread ever
How to not be attacked by armed "terrorists" 101:
1) don't occupy other people's land
2) don't treat them like shit on their own land
3) don't act like you own the place
It's really simple
why do certain idiots fail regardless?
1) don't occupy other people's land
2) don't treat them like shit on their own land
3) don't act like you own the place
It's really simple
why do certain idiots fail regardless?
They sure deserved what they got!
How to not be attacked by armed "terrorists" 101:
1) don't occupy other people's land
2) don't treat them like shit on their own land
3) don't act like you own the place
It's really simple why do certain idiots fail regardless?
1) don't occupy other people's land
2) don't treat them like shit on their own land
3) don't act like you own the place
It's really simple
why do certain idiots fail regardless?
Post automatically merged:
oh, back to Latino cat fight
Post automatically merged:
Same goes for you. You have school tomorrow.
That's technoscientism. A belief that technology can only bring good things. Its not based on fact. In reality it can do good as much as it can do very bad things.
I hope you understand that what is being talked about here, is literally something that can be created now:
- We have the technology to face track people
- We have the technology to create drone that can target specific goal
- We have drone that can kill
If some crazy country decides to hit the "start manufacturing button" for this BS, it will be operative in less than a year.
Simply because AI is not created to think, its created to copy and extrapolate, which is not an act of creativity.
Art is about understanding reality and how it work THEN to retranscribe it into a new form that must appeal to emotions.
When a tech bros type a prompt, he is not trying to understand how reality work and how it impacts our emotions and he will therefore be unable to understand if his final product will be able to create an impact in return. That's why to make art you need to be an artist and being an artist is not just painting beautiful pics, its understanding something about reality.
This is why the "art" you can see from AI is not really impactfull, it just look good, but that's just an illusion. The day you will see beautiful AI art, is the day true artist (and not just tech bro) will use the tech to enhance their OWN art. That day, you might see wonders because of AI, but its not soon.
People who are telling you that Ai used in military and that AI could be used as a tool for mass destruction with clear precedent is "alarmist"now ?
Well.. if being an alarmist is telling you how dangerous it is to expect technological progress without ethic, then I'm an alarmist.
Ai is literally being used right now against human rights, if you can see that, then you might wanna check what happens in china.
No one is defending the killing of woman and children here mate. Relax.
No, insults are. if you can't make the difference, there is a problem.
I'm still waiting.
Sorry, this is another report.
And now, you expect other people to do the same, just because you can't wait for progress to come. In my book, I call this a baby tantrum:
"I want my progress now, no matter the repercussions"
The thing you are not understanding here, is that there is no actual need right now to put millions of people into the streets because of AI. What we need is for a better system, better pays and the end of capitalism, we do not need AI right now. Only techBros and ultra libertarians like you who can't wait to play with their next AI toys (that they will mostly missunderstand) are urging for everyone to accept this right now.
And here comes the libertarian and liberal inhuman rethoric. But perhaps you are right, perhaps Van Gogh was not competent at all... perhaps you know better about art that he did...
LMAO, the ignorance of capitalists...
Can you direct me to the work I "stumped" on please ?
Or are you just inventing things as you go ?
Maybe you should listen to actual artist instead of AI tech bro who call themself artist because they are good at making prompts..
Damn, the more you call me "animal" the more I feel like you are hitting on me...
I do. Mate, don't worry about that.
Oh... so creating a bomb is okay... its just using it that is not... hm ? Yeah.. I'm sure you think you are making sence here hehehe.
It is known that murderer will justify their act however they can, its not new Mate. It doesn't deny the fact that smashing two atomic bombs on millions of people is not really ethical. Its not even needed in fact.
Actually no. Without ethic we can still have laws. But we would have bad laws and bad customs. Ethic is not something we are naturally born with.
Ethic is constructed. Its maintained.
No, generally the act I disagree with, are just lacking ethic. When you consider that you can put million into the street and that it is normal to expect them to battle to the death to survive just for you to have progress, then its not really ethical my tech bro.
You are just being an horrible human being.
Then here is your subject:
How is bombing millions of people, "progress" ?
You have three hours.
Yes, I alarm people of the rise of fascist ideas and the inhuman ultra liberal and libertarian ideologies like yours. I completely agree with that. I don't think people really understand how much of a danger you really are.
"Regulate", yes
"Control", not in absolute no, not really.
"Limiting creativity" .. by explaining that artist's work should not be stolen by ignorant people and techbros, I don't know how you get that...
And
"Kill"... actual WTF lol ?
Are you transforming into a Dalek ?
..s ro dah ?
.. riosa ?
...ll metal alchimist ?
???????
No, I'm just a watermelon.
I hope you understand that what is being talked about here, is literally something that can be created now:
- We have the technology to face track people
- We have the technology to create drone that can target specific goal
- We have drone that can kill
If some crazy country decides to hit the "start manufacturing button" for this BS, it will be operative in less than a year.
Simply because AI is not created to think, its created to copy and extrapolate, which is not an act of creativity.
Art is about understanding reality and how it work THEN to retranscribe it into a new form that must appeal to emotions.
When a tech bros type a prompt, he is not trying to understand how reality work and how it impacts our emotions and he will therefore be unable to understand if his final product will be able to create an impact in return. That's why to make art you need to be an artist and being an artist is not just painting beautiful pics, its understanding something about reality.
This is why the "art" you can see from AI is not really impactfull, it just look good, but that's just an illusion. The day you will see beautiful AI art, is the day true artist (and not just tech bro) will use the tech to enhance their OWN art. That day, you might see wonders because of AI, but its not soon.
People who are telling you that Ai used in military and that AI could be used as a tool for mass destruction with clear precedent is "alarmist"now ?
Well.. if being an alarmist is telling you how dangerous it is to expect technological progress without ethic, then I'm an alarmist.
Ai is literally being used right now against human rights, if you can see that, then you might wanna check what happens in china.
No one is defending the killing of woman and children here mate. Relax.
No, insults are. if you can't make the difference, there is a problem.
I'm still waiting.
Sorry, this is another report.
And now, you expect other people to do the same, just because you can't wait for progress to come. In my book, I call this a baby tantrum:
"I want my progress now, no matter the repercussions"
The thing you are not understanding here, is that there is no actual need right now to put millions of people into the streets because of AI. What we need is for a better system, better pays and the end of capitalism, we do not need AI right now. Only techBros and ultra libertarians like you who can't wait to play with their next AI toys (that they will mostly missunderstand) are urging for everyone to accept this right now.
And here comes the libertarian and liberal inhuman rethoric. But perhaps you are right, perhaps Van Gogh was not competent at all... perhaps you know better about art that he did...
LMAO, the ignorance of capitalists...
Can you direct me to the work I "stumped" on please ?
Or are you just inventing things as you go ?
Maybe you should listen to actual artist instead of AI tech bro who call themself artist because they are good at making prompts..
Damn, the more you call me "animal" the more I feel like you are hitting on me...
I do. Mate, don't worry about that.
Oh... so creating a bomb is okay... its just using it that is not... hm ? Yeah.. I'm sure you think you are making sence here hehehe.
It is known that murderer will justify their act however they can, its not new Mate. It doesn't deny the fact that smashing two atomic bombs on millions of people is not really ethical. Its not even needed in fact.
Actually no. Without ethic we can still have laws. But we would have bad laws and bad customs. Ethic is not something we are naturally born with.
Ethic is constructed. Its maintained.
No, generally the act I disagree with, are just lacking ethic. When you consider that you can put million into the street and that it is normal to expect them to battle to the death to survive just for you to have progress, then its not really ethical my tech bro.
You are just being an horrible human being.
Then here is your subject:
How is bombing millions of people, "progress" ?
You have three hours.
Yes, I alarm people of the rise of fascist ideas and the inhuman ultra liberal and libertarian ideologies like yours. I completely agree with that. I don't think people really understand how much of a danger you really are.
"Regulate", yes
"Control", not in absolute no, not really.
"Limiting creativity" .. by explaining that artist's work should not be stolen by ignorant people and techbros, I don't know how you get that...
And
"Kill"... actual WTF lol ?
Are you transforming into a Dalek ?
..s ro dah ?
.. riosa ?
...ll metal alchimist ?
???????
No, I'm just a watermelon.
Good that you agree that you are a ignorant alarmist.
Hypocrite
You need a dictionary and a understanding of degree of value. You was aware that insults were not appreciated and insisted on it. Don't cry like a bitch when it don't go your way.
Ok. Don't complain like a bitch, later.
Cry me a river and take a pill for your hurt ego.
For anyone with half a brain it should not be a issue to understand what the point was about. But you said that your brain don't work properly so I will not take it on you. Life already did.
Look at the definition of ethics. Again, don't talk bullshit without knowing about the subject.
Again, look at the definition of ethics. There's a reason why it's considered subjective and not objective, like you claim.
You are just proving yourself ignorant. After you look at proper definition of ethics you will understand why Presentism is frowned upon by anyone that likes history.
This is not the correct question, animal. I stated that war brings progress which is something that any kid should have learned in history class. It's a know fact that wars force technology to advance and when the same technology is brought to the common man it brings advances and security. Basic example is radar. It also brings advances in some other fields, including policial sciences ( most of the ideals of fundamental rights started in the french revolution- a war- and were developed later) and even how we see science (without the horrors of the trenchs the Geneva Convention would never exist, the same as the general hate for eugenics after WWII). Of course, progress is not linear, but yes- even war bring progress.
Yeah, yeah. A failure of a human being that is worthless for society trying to bring awareness. The modern Don Quixote.
Nah, watermelons are useful and people even like them. They are not like you.
Hypocrite
You need a dictionary and a understanding of degree of value. You was aware that insults were not appreciated and insisted on it. Don't cry like a bitch when it don't go your way.
Ok. Don't complain like a bitch, later.
Cry me a river and take a pill for your hurt ego.
For anyone with half a brain it should not be a issue to understand what the point was about. But you said that your brain don't work properly so I will not take it on you. Life already did.
Look at the definition of ethics. Again, don't talk bullshit without knowing about the subject.
Again, look at the definition of ethics. There's a reason why it's considered subjective and not objective, like you claim.
You are just proving yourself ignorant. After you look at proper definition of ethics you will understand why Presentism is frowned upon by anyone that likes history.
This is not the correct question, animal. I stated that war brings progress which is something that any kid should have learned in history class. It's a know fact that wars force technology to advance and when the same technology is brought to the common man it brings advances and security. Basic example is radar. It also brings advances in some other fields, including policial sciences ( most of the ideals of fundamental rights started in the french revolution- a war- and were developed later) and even how we see science (without the horrors of the trenchs the Geneva Convention would never exist, the same as the general hate for eugenics after WWII). Of course, progress is not linear, but yes- even war bring progress.
Yeah, yeah. A failure of a human being that is worthless for society trying to bring awareness. The modern Don Quixote.
Nah, watermelons are useful and people even like them. They are not like you.
Alarmist of problematic vision like yours yes. Ignorant, not really as I know full well how dangerous your vision is for people and how much harm libertarianism and ultra capitalism can do.
Not really no.
I do cry, I cry a lot actually, for a lot of things, but rarely because of fascism or capitalism. No, I rather be angry about it, its a bit more powerfull to fight it.
You can't really go two sentence without sluring do you ?
If you want.. I love this song. Have fun ! :)
Oof, that shot did hurt a bit.. Nice one
:cheers:
Its funny how it is always the bigoted people who are screaming "look at the definition" when they want to justify the horrible things they advocate for.
I did read the definition and my point still stand my tech bro.
Sure :)
Why are you suddenly talking about the philosophy of time ? You want to have have a metaphysical debate ?
Fine then, what do you think about the idea that time might be just an illusion ?
Nothing to do with the subject ? Yes I know.. that's exactly what you are doing here.
Now I really think that you are hitting on me...
I'm sorry but I'm not really that interested, your vision of the world is too inhuman for my taste, but thanks anyway ..
Wow.. Wars brings progress now ?
The more it goes, the better it gets...
Progress is not only mesured by our technological advance Sun Zu, but also and moreso by our capacity for humanity and our ability to become better and better humans as time progress.
North Corea has radars, planes, tanks & Rockets. Do you feel like this society is swimming in progress right now ?
No. It only accelerate the process. Which can create good things or again, very bad things:
And as a result we get this:
And next thing you know, there is a giant gorilla swinging a glowing axe on your heads and you end up into the hollow earth...
French revolution wasn't a war, it was a riot mate, a bloody riot, but still a riot. If you are starting calling "war" any type of conflict you are not gonna sleep..
And this is not the war in itself that started the right, its because people wanted those rights in the first place that they started rioting. But rioting is not the only option to get new rights.
Yeah, and without the war and stupid gov. Millions wouldn't have been sent toward meaningless death either... not really a progress here.
Wrong. Again, war only accelerate the process.
We have a name for people like you in militantism. We call you "accelerationnist". You are the type of people that are willing to put millions under intense suffering fast, just for the promisse of a better tomorrow. You guys prefer people to suffer now rather than to wait for progress or to fight for it fair and square.
But if there is ONE things that you should've learned reading mangas and especially One Piece :
There is no such things as shortcuts toward peace and progress.
You have really learned nothing do you ?
When you start saying that a person is "worthless" for society or anything else..
.. On what side of history do you think you really are ?
Damn.. I can't even be a watermelon
Not really no.
I do cry, I cry a lot actually, for a lot of things, but rarely because of fascism or capitalism. No, I rather be angry about it, its a bit more powerfull to fight it.
You can't really go two sentence without sluring do you ?
If you want.. I love this song. Have fun ! :)
Oof, that shot did hurt a bit.. Nice one
:cheers:
Its funny how it is always the bigoted people who are screaming "look at the definition" when they want to justify the horrible things they advocate for.
I did read the definition and my point still stand my tech bro.
Sure :)
Why are you suddenly talking about the philosophy of time ? You want to have have a metaphysical debate ?
Fine then, what do you think about the idea that time might be just an illusion ?
Nothing to do with the subject ? Yes I know.. that's exactly what you are doing here.
Now I really think that you are hitting on me...
I'm sorry but I'm not really that interested, your vision of the world is too inhuman for my taste, but thanks anyway ..
Wow.. Wars brings progress now ?
The more it goes, the better it gets...
Progress is not only mesured by our technological advance Sun Zu, but also and moreso by our capacity for humanity and our ability to become better and better humans as time progress.
North Corea has radars, planes, tanks & Rockets. Do you feel like this society is swimming in progress right now ?
No. It only accelerate the process. Which can create good things or again, very bad things:
And as a result we get this:
And next thing you know, there is a giant gorilla swinging a glowing axe on your heads and you end up into the hollow earth...
French revolution wasn't a war, it was a riot mate, a bloody riot, but still a riot. If you are starting calling "war" any type of conflict you are not gonna sleep..
And this is not the war in itself that started the right, its because people wanted those rights in the first place that they started rioting. But rioting is not the only option to get new rights.
Yeah, and without the war and stupid gov. Millions wouldn't have been sent toward meaningless death either... not really a progress here.
Wrong. Again, war only accelerate the process.
We have a name for people like you in militantism. We call you "accelerationnist". You are the type of people that are willing to put millions under intense suffering fast, just for the promisse of a better tomorrow. You guys prefer people to suffer now rather than to wait for progress or to fight for it fair and square.
But if there is ONE things that you should've learned reading mangas and especially One Piece :
There is no such things as shortcuts toward peace and progress.
You have really learned nothing do you ?
When you start saying that a person is "worthless" for society or anything else..
.. On what side of history do you think you really are ?
Damn.. I can't even be a watermelon
H
I Saud exactly that. Except that will ALWAYS make life better despite the bad things it brings. Putting on a balance it will always tend to be better.
Yeah? And it can be used to kill terrorists while lowering civils waste. And it can be tracked who sent the order and stuff. There will be counters to that too. Drones can be hacked and shut down. Technology will allow poor country to be on equal foot with rich country.
But as I said it is still far from what you are proposing.
This goes pretty against the proposal of AI that is to think. Why people would be so hurt about it if it is simple a bot like many others we already have nowadays and no one freaks out about it?
Yeah? And it can be used to kill terrorists while lowering civils waste. And it can be tracked who sent the order and stuff. There will be counters to that too. Drones can be hacked and shut down. Technology will allow poor country to be on equal foot with rich country.
But as I said it is still far from what you are proposing.
This goes pretty against the proposal of AI that is to think. Why people would be so hurt about it if it is simple a bot like many others we already have nowadays and no one freaks out about it?
Ok, lets short this up, since most of your quotes are just to try and show how ''good'' you are.
This is the definition according to merriam-webster and if you actually look at the definition you would see that I was clearly speaking about:
>the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group
when I say that almost everyone has ethics. Those principles may not be what you consider moral and agree with your morality (Note: this is the link to the dictionary since you seem to mistaken both. Look at 4) but it does not mean that they don't exist. There's even some debate about distorted ethical values of serial-killers since many seem to think that they are doing the word a favor (with plenty of evidence that this is just a tactic to get empathy).
And since you seem to be unable to connect the dots: what this all mean is that every society has those principles of conduct and use them to evaluate what is right or wrong.
No. Presentism is not the phylosophy of time but a fallacy where someone looks at the actions of those in the past and instead of considering what they are doing using their ethics and situation at the time use their own values and morals. This warps the analysis and makes it almost useless. When you try to evaluate actions of people in the past using your very narrow set of ethics (that not even everyone in your own time may agree) you are acting like a stupid retard.
I don't even know where did you took the idea about philosophy of time.
Yes. Progress(in this case look at the use as a verb-to develop to a higher, better, or more advanced stage or noun-gradual betterment) is something that happen with wars, usually technological progress. That's why usually a normal person states in which area the progress happen and that's also why I divided the post in different kinds of progress. Only a absolute retard would argue that the progress on one subject equals progress in all subjects. War usually brings technological progress that can be used to improve society as a whole later.
Again, open a book.
Remember when I said that only a retard would argue that a progress in a field equals progress in all fields?
Yeah, forces it to progress, develop.(again- to develop to a higher, better, or more advanced stage). You would know that if you had looked at the definition of progress.
You should open a history book. The French Revolution was a period of 10 years and it ended up causing wars that affected the whole Europe, eventually leading to Napoleon rise(some may argue that the american revolution as just a new stage of the revolutionary wars). While some events like the storming of Bastille can be considered riots, the war of the first coalization-as a example- wasn't. Again, try to at least research the subject before talking bullshit. Even if you fucking listened to the national anthem of france you would know that they were fighting against outsiders.
Actually most of the background of the war was not because of civil rights but based on economical issues. Most of the merchants were more afraid of not getting their money back than the rights of the common man. The whole issue with Necker and the storming of Bastille could be avoided. Even when they won, they didn't abolish the king at first. The development of fundamental rights wasn't like you think.
According to your morality and lack of understanding of the subject? Maybe. Creating rules for military engagements, that even if not always followed, could be used to avoid more deaths in subsequent wars is progress. I recommend you look at the site of the red cross to see why they value the Convention so much: This is the link. The world would be absolutely a worse place without this convention and other treaties that come after it. Trying to dismiss it as it is unimportant is disgusting.
Yeah. That's directly what I stated. War bring progress. During the war technology advances in a quick way and can be brought to the masses earlier.
That's stupid. If war accelerate technological progress it is literally taking a shorter time. i.e: a shortcut.
You keep making those stupid comments because you are too lazy or dumb to even look at the definitions of the words and use them in a narrow way, while ignoring all the other meanings.
Oh, I can hurt the feelings of a useless bum that just waste resources and complain online.
But ok. I will stop replying to you now. This is getting tiresome.
Good luck and I hope you get better.
This is the definition according to merriam-webster and if you actually look at the definition you would see that I was clearly speaking about:
>the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group
when I say that almost everyone has ethics. Those principles may not be what you consider moral and agree with your morality (Note: this is the link to the dictionary since you seem to mistaken both. Look at 4) but it does not mean that they don't exist. There's even some debate about distorted ethical values of serial-killers since many seem to think that they are doing the word a favor (with plenty of evidence that this is just a tactic to get empathy).
And since you seem to be unable to connect the dots: what this all mean is that every society has those principles of conduct and use them to evaluate what is right or wrong.
No. Presentism is not the phylosophy of time but a fallacy where someone looks at the actions of those in the past and instead of considering what they are doing using their ethics and situation at the time use their own values and morals. This warps the analysis and makes it almost useless. When you try to evaluate actions of people in the past using your very narrow set of ethics (that not even everyone in your own time may agree) you are acting like a stupid retard.
I don't even know where did you took the idea about philosophy of time.
Yes. Progress(in this case look at the use as a verb-to develop to a higher, better, or more advanced stage or noun-gradual betterment) is something that happen with wars, usually technological progress. That's why usually a normal person states in which area the progress happen and that's also why I divided the post in different kinds of progress. Only a absolute retard would argue that the progress on one subject equals progress in all subjects. War usually brings technological progress that can be used to improve society as a whole later.
Again, open a book.
Remember when I said that only a retard would argue that a progress in a field equals progress in all fields?
Yeah, forces it to progress, develop.(again- to develop to a higher, better, or more advanced stage). You would know that if you had looked at the definition of progress.
You should open a history book. The French Revolution was a period of 10 years and it ended up causing wars that affected the whole Europe, eventually leading to Napoleon rise(some may argue that the american revolution as just a new stage of the revolutionary wars). While some events like the storming of Bastille can be considered riots, the war of the first coalization-as a example- wasn't. Again, try to at least research the subject before talking bullshit. Even if you fucking listened to the national anthem of france you would know that they were fighting against outsiders.
Actually most of the background of the war was not because of civil rights but based on economical issues. Most of the merchants were more afraid of not getting their money back than the rights of the common man. The whole issue with Necker and the storming of Bastille could be avoided. Even when they won, they didn't abolish the king at first. The development of fundamental rights wasn't like you think.
According to your morality and lack of understanding of the subject? Maybe. Creating rules for military engagements, that even if not always followed, could be used to avoid more deaths in subsequent wars is progress. I recommend you look at the site of the red cross to see why they value the Convention so much: This is the link. The world would be absolutely a worse place without this convention and other treaties that come after it. Trying to dismiss it as it is unimportant is disgusting.
Yeah. That's directly what I stated. War bring progress. During the war technology advances in a quick way and can be brought to the masses earlier.
That's stupid. If war accelerate technological progress it is literally taking a shorter time. i.e: a shortcut.
You keep making those stupid comments because you are too lazy or dumb to even look at the definitions of the words and use them in a narrow way, while ignoring all the other meanings.
Oh, I can hurt the feelings of a useless bum that just waste resources and complain online.
But ok. I will stop replying to you now. This is getting tiresome.
Good luck and I hope you get better.