I mean, kinda, yeah. But people masturbate. They’re not hurting anyone doing it. The idea that anyone had masturbated thinking of me would be a self esteem booster. That said, that’s a pipe dream. Ain’t nobody ever got off to all of this outside of an actual sexual encounter. Lmao
I had someone say they wanted me (as part of a conversation about preferences, not totally off topic) and it was honestly really flattering. I told em I was ace and we moved on. It was like seven years ago but I’ll cherish that memory forever…
Omg, what a true answer, it happened to me too. And more than once, if I were gay I wouldn’t even have to worry, I’ve always been very liked by gays, I don’t know why, but it’s true.
My understanding is most shorthand/euphemisms nowadays seem to originate from tiktok’s strict and sometimes inscrutable censorship rules. Maybe this is one of them?
Edit: apparently this was a case of text-to-speech gone away. I prefer my head cannon of tiktok trying to censor conversations about anyone who “pays for” an elicit service.
Everyone had been telling him he was the smartest guy in the room, and he thought he was. Plus BTC and crypto are still kinda in shaky legal status, and he’d made a lot of donations to politicians.
Crypto ain’t cash, they can unravel the block chain and figure out the transactions. He can’t just disappear with a few mil and not be followed.
He was an MIT grad in physics and minor in math, his girlfriend was a mathmatician too. Clearly he must be intelligent. Maybe he wasn’t the genius everybody hailed him as. However if you are smart enough to understand topology and other math-related topics, I would assume that he would be smart enough to funnel money out to secret untraceable accounts, buy diamonds and stash them at strategic locations in numerous countries, have an exit strategy.
Why couldn’t he just have bought a submarine and flee to russia? Or just make a run for it on a regular boat?
I have a lot of trouble believing that if you have all that money, and you have at least as much smarts as the average math student, that you cannot extracate yourself from the situation he was in.
You are making a mistake that a lot of people do. Just because you are intelligent in one particular field doesn’t mean that knowledge applies elsewhere. Time and time again we’ve seen some insane theories from truly talented people. My go to example is Ben Carson is a world renowned doctor who pioneered and succeeded in a surgery no one ever could have thought possible. He also believes the pyramids were used to store grain.
Intelligence and stupidity are not mutually exclusive.
IQ isn’t reliable and hasn’t been for a very long time, if ever. People get smart in areas, not overall. The brain is like a video game in that sense. You get skill points and get to spec them into certain areas. Some people spread them around and get middling knowledge in all areas but you won’t ever find someone who’s a genius universally. It’s just not a thing.
Then you’ve got something else that is extremely important to this discussion. Arrogance. The smarter you are the more arrogant you tend to be. Usually not on purpose. Mostly it’s a byproduct of being told you’re smart constantly or by everyone else being slower than you and you get frustrated. When you have that arrogance you don’t seem to be aware of what you don’t know.
Which leads me to a third thing. Actual smart people don’t assume they have knowledge. They know they don’t know a lot and are really hesitant. Conversely, people who aren’t that intelligent are usually convinced they know more than they do. Why? Because they’re not smart enough to see gaps in their knowledge. They’re looking at what’s in front of them but not the overall picture.
All of that leads to this dude just genuinely not being smart. He was a combination of lucky and knowledgeable in a particular field.
I sure as hell wouldn’t have committed major financial crimes to float a failing company run by some gal I only occasionally wanted to bang. Dude is a top notch dumbass.
And then there’s also a difference between being intelligent and being smart. If you are intelligent, you might know how to cheat in a videogame. But if you are smart, you know that this a bad idea because of a plethora of reasons.
He did do what other rich folk do. Based himself in a tax haven and, initially, tried to challenge extradition.
Not many rich folk end up on trial. But even fewer end up absconding with their cash, never to be seen again. He is the normal kind of rich folk: he assumed he would get away with it because he is a born-rich kid who has never faced a consequence in his life.
There is a difference between rich and powerful,perfectly illustrated by comparing this guy to any number of rich assholes who should be in jail but aren’t.
If he was powerful he would have been able to skip out on consequences. That’s what power makes possible. Simply donating to politicians is nowhere near enough. You need to have connections, leverage, relationships, etc.
When you have insane amounts of money, you get what you want.
He likely shopped around high price lawyers, but since he’s used to being told he’s right and a genius. He would have hired a law firm that agreed with him and said he’d be fine.
They likely knew better, but told him what he wanted to hear and took his money with a smile.
What you are saying is that he had a head for numbers.
That says absolutely nothing about his ability to function in society. He had a personal world view that was extremely self-centred and ignored most US social values. The way he operated his businesses shows that he also had no clue how to responsibly manage a business; he left the wrong tasks to the wrong people and left tasks to others that were his responsibility as CEO. He felt that telling others that something was legal was just as good as actually making sure that the things he wanted to do actually WERE legal.
So… not delusional, just ignorant of pretty much everything outside his own narrow area of expertise, and assuming that his smarts at math automatically made him an expert at everything without actually learning the details of how everything else worked.
SBF was arrogant as fuck, and a bunch of rich people mistook it as eccentric genius so they started praising him as a genius. He did some very stupid things and he definitely isn’t a genius, but isn’t an idiot either. He’s smart enough to know when he’s got.
Yeah, that’s about it. I’ve trown buggy code at it, tell it to check it, says it’ll work just fine… scripts as well. You really can’t trust anything that that thing outputs and it’s more than 1 or 2 lines long (hello world examples excluded, they work just fine in most cases).
There is a (non-meme) reason why Prompt Engineer is a real title these days. It takes a measure of skill to get the model to focus on and attempt to solve the right question. This becomes even more apparent if you try to generate a product description where a newb will get something filled with superlative lies and a pro will get something better than most human writers in the field can muster for a much lower cost per text (compared to professional writers, often on par or more expensive than content farms). AI is a great tool, but it’s neither the only tool (don’t hammer in screws) nor is it perfect. The best approach is to let the AI do the easy boiler plate 80% then add that human touch to the hard 20% and at most have the AI prepare the structure / stubs.
I’m totally willing to accept “the world is changing and new skills are necessary” but at the same time, are a prompt engineer’s skills transferrable across subject domains?
It feels to me like “prompt engineering” skills are just skills to compliment the expertise you already have. Like the skill of Google searching. Or learning to use a word processor. These are skills necessary in the world today, but almost nobody’s job is exclusively to Google, or use a word processor. In reality, you need to get something done with your tool, and you need to know shit about the domain you’re applying that tool to. You can be an excellent prompt engineer, and I guess an LLM will allow you to BS really well, but subject matter experts will see through the BS.
I know I’m not really strongly disagreeing, but I’m just pushing back on the idea of prompt engineer as a job (without any other expertise).
We’re not talking small organizations here, nor small projects. In those cases it’s true that you can’t “only” do prompt engineering but where I see it is in larger orgs where you bring into the team the know how about how to prompt efficiently, how to do refinement, where to do variable substitution and how, etc etc. The closest analogy is specific tech skills, like say DBs, for a small firm its just something one backend dude knows decently, at a large firm there are several DBAs and they help teams tackle complex DB questions. Same with say Search, first Solr and nowadays Elastic. Or for that matter Networks, in many cases there might be absolutely no one at the whole firm that knows anything more than the basics because you have another company doing it for you.
The closest analogy is specific tech skills, like say DBs, for a small firm its just something one backend dude knows decently, at a large firm there are several DBAs and they help teams tackle complex DB questions. Same with say Search, first Solr and nowadays Elastic.
Yeah I mean I guess we’re saying the same thing then :)
I don’t think prompt engineering could be somebody’s only job, just a skill they bring to the job, like the examples you give. In those cases, they’d still need to be a good DBA, or whatever the specific role is. They’re a DBA who knows prompt engineering, etc.
Have you looked at the project that spins up multiple LLM “identities” where they are “told” the issue to solve, one is asked to generate code for it, the others “critique” it, it generates new code based on the feedback, then it can automatically run it, if it fails it gets the error message so it can fix the issues, and only once it has generated code that works and is “accepted” by the other identities, it is given back to you
It sounds a bit silly, but it turns out to work quite well apparently, critiquing code is apparently easier than generating it, and iterating on code based on critiques and runtime feedback is much easier than producing correct code in one go
The software that implements multi agents called ChatDev, it’s significant more capable than one agent working alone. The ability to critique and fix bugs in the code in an iterative process gives a massive step up to the ability of the AI to program.
Granted it might still get in a loop between the programing and testing departments, but it’s a solid step in the right direction.
That’s how I use Chat GPT. Not for coding, but for help on how to get Excel to do things. I guess some of what I want to do are fairly esoteric, so just searching for help doesn’t really turn up anything useful. If I explain to GPT what I’ll trying to do, it’ll give me avenues to explore.
I have a spreadsheet with items with their price and quantity bought. I want to include a discount with multiple tiers, based on how much items have been bought, and have a small table where I can define quantity and a discount that applies to that quantity. Which Excel functions should I use?
Response:
You can achieve this in Excel using the VLOOKUP or INDEX-MATCH functions along with the IF function.
Create a table with quantity and corresponding discounts.
Use VLOOKUP or INDEX-MATCH to find the discount based on the quantity in your main table.
Use IF to apply different discounts based on quantity tiers.
Using AI in this way is what finally pushed me to learn databases instead of trying to make excel do tricks it’s not optimal for anyways.
I tried a bunch of iterations of various AI resources and even stuff like the Google Sheets integration and most of them just annoyed me into finding better ways to search for what I was trying to do. Eventually I had to stop ignoring the real problem and pivot to software better optimized for the work I was trying to do with it.
I’ve found it’s best use to me as a glorified auto-complete. It knows pretty well what I want to type before I get a chance to type it. Yes, I don’t trust stuff it comes up with on its own though, then I need to Google it
Yeah, I find it works really well for brainstorming and “rubber-ducking” when I’m thinking about approaches to something. Things I’d normally do in a conversation with a coworker when I really am looking more for a listener than for actual feedback.
I can also usually get useful code out of it that would otherwise be tedious or fiddly to write myself. Things like “take this big enum and write a function that converts the members to human-friendly strings.”
Tell ChatGPT you want to do the project as an exercise and that it should not write any pseudocode. It will then give you a high-level breakdown which is usually a decent guide line.
There are species of seals who actively keep holes open in the ice to use as breathing holes, allowing them to hunt fish even in frozen-over bodies of water.
They're all ocean-dwelling species in the arctic or antarctic oceans, so this isn't the answer to your specific question, but I just think they're neat.
In my opinion it’s not useless at all. Lemmy marks the comments as edited, but that’s just to show the fact that it was edited. But if you add the reason why you edited, that makes it a whole lot more transparent.
Sometimes it could happen that I see a great comment full of great ideas from a great user, and it could be lengthy as well. Then later I go back to see the reactions, and I see the comment was edited. If I don’t know what was edited on it, then I have to read the whole comment again. But if it’s clearly stated that only typos were fixed, then I don’t bother with re-reading the comment.
Lemmy needs to get rid of edit if you edit within 1 min. Often you’ll see a typo after you post and you have to edit. There should be a grace period like reddit.
That’s because apparently someone decided, without discussion, that setting military headquarters in a hospital - where babies are born - is absolutely fine and moral move.
Wow, a tunnel near a hospital. There’s tunnels under my university too. Should the idf siege it?What I’m asking for is clear evidence that Hamas was using the hospital as a command center. I still haven’t seen any of that.
Perhaps get them to send you their hostage watching schedule / calendar that the IDF was showing off as evidence too. Or the the mysteriously multiplying guns and “one take” “no editing” english video that has edits in it…
Yea there’s no consensus that the ‘evidence’ produced is reliable. At first IDF showed the hatch to a water cistern and said it was the hatch to the network of tunnels. This new photo could just be a hole in the ground. The tour through the MRI room and truck loaded with weapons could be easily planted. Independent investigations like Forensic Architecture have found discrepancies and raised questions over the legitimacy of IDFs claims. Al Jazeera has reported that IDF had misreported facts to build a narrative.
US intelligence agrees that Hamas was operating out of the hospital, but there not much else backing up these claims right now.
"Cobb-Smith has joined with the most politicized anti-Israel NGOs in pushing false or unsubstantiated accusations of Israeli violations of the laws of war […] In particular, he circulated false claims (“there was no tactical reason; there was no reasonable use of that weapon system”) as well as claims (later discredited) that the IDF used white phosphorous “in an illegal manner.” Similarly, he has been involved with the campaigns of the anti-Israel NGO known as Forensic Architecture.
Oh okey, I understand better what you mean by “not much to back those claims”
I did some quick searches on him and saw he was with amnesty international. This didn’t come up for me. I’ll remove him as a reference. Appreciate the insight to him.
They pulled that from a site called NGO-Monitor. It’s a right wing Israeli outlet that exists specifically to dismiss claims from international NGOs. It’s about as credible as the government itself denying it committed crimes.
Except there’s very credible evidence Israel uses WP illegally. There’s literally photos of it available online. Is that the IDF calling him biased or what?
Overall, we rate the NGO Monitor Right biased based on support for the right-wing Israeli government. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting based on the consistent promotion of pro-Israeli propaganda
Maybe we should wait until there’s been a more neutral investigation before deciding it’s one hundred percent true.
What I never understand about major news stories is that so many people take everything they see at face value and then consider it indisputable fact. When there’s an international war going on, no one thinks that just maybe we’re only getting a fraction of reality communicated to us? That it must be the worst game of telephone in terms of accuracy? But then if someone even suggests that maybe there’s more to the story, they’re conspiracy theorists or they get told what “side” they’re on.
We should all be at least somewhat discerning. There’s so many different actors with interests in this war. We have no idea what else could be going on that we will never, ever hear about, nor how much spin is being put on the stuff we do hear about.
Do you really think only you had this thought? Don’t you think this is exactly what I think about your opinions? And telling this in my face literally does nothing because I am just as convinced that you gobble up Al-Jazeera/Hamas propaganda as, supposedly, I am gobbling up Israeli propaganda?
What would convince you? Based on what I can glean from various sources, it seems at least likely that the claim is true. I also don’t see what incentive the Israelis have to lie about it.
Well think about it for a moment. What I mean is that they already know that they will be accused of lying regardless, so why bother “fabricating” an ambiguous account when they could just as easily lie and claim that they found a giant Hamas command center?
In other words, they have no incentive to lie about the attack having achieved ambiguous results unless they are actually telling the truth. If you are going to lie, and if you know you won’t be believed regardless, why not go whole hog?
Again, they have no incentive to half-ass it unless they’re simply stating the truth.
If they don’t have something believable then the Boycott, Divest, and Sanction movement will cut off their Western support and see them on trial in the Hague.
Getting the lie right or persuading the world they really really did believe this has literal existential consequences for the politicians and generals.
So then when terrorists use human shields, which in this case include literal babies, it’s okay to ignore the human shields and just indiscriminately attack?
I didn’t say “it was okey”. I said i do understand why that happens. I am also saying Israel takes some steps to limit the number of civil victims, while Hamas takes none
Hamas has a different agenda. It’s an asymmetrical conflict. The intention of Hamas and Hezbollah is to provoke Israel into a genocide. Hiding among the trees to incite Netanyahu to burn down the forest.
They want nothing more then to get on video Israeli forces massacring thousands of Palestinian civilians.
I’m not an expert. So I’d defer to Lt. General James Glynn, survivor of Fallujah on how to approach the situation in Gaza.
I’d also refer to centuries of counter-insurgency that notes that massacring civilians only drives more recruits to the enemy cause, often recruits who are willing to engage in suicide missions.
Even leaving the hospital intact and doing nothing was a better option, and in fact, Israel is not fighting a war of desperation, and can actually afford to approach violence with deliberation and consideration.
The reason Netanyahu is behaving like Trump or George W. Bush is because he likes the idea of rushing in with stormtroopers and crushing the enemy, not because it’s actually a good idea. And that’s why Hezbollah provoked him in the first place.
I am not a fan of Netanyahu/Trump/Bush neither, however you only described what not to do.
I am still convinced that taking out Hamas out of Gaza is the viable long term solution. I don’t know about the hospital, and believe IDF knows better than me
Actually I said doing nothing would be better than what they did so that is, compared to bombing a hospital, a viable alternative.
Getting Hamas out of Gaza is going to be like getting white supremacists out of the US. It’s virtually impossible, but when the hearts and minds of the public are not pissed off due to poor governance, they can be reduced to a fringe group.
So if Israel stopped its thousand-year religious resentment plan, provided relief and then promoted equal treatment of the Palestinian public (installed enforcement of civil rights) that would do a tuckfun to reduce the significance of Hamas, Hezbollah or any other terrorist groups Iran or Russia might throw into the mix.
But this requires the right-wing identity groups in Israel giving up their ethnostate and modernizing their attitude — what is a challenge even for the EU and US (though the US stopped trying over a century ago).
So I’m going to watch Israel bath Gaza in the blood of Palistianians and make the rest of the world sick to their stomachs, and we’ll all promise, yet again, never to let this happen, to never forget.
See, the consequences of Israel jackbooting like every other imperialist is built into the paradigm. Sadly it’ll also add fuel to the antisemitic fires already igniting across the world. The thing is, Netanyahu and the IDF have bought the ticket to ride, as if no lives they cared about were actually in the balance.
Alright, you do have sensible arguments. I based my opinion on the fact that Hamas could be taken down, just like ISIS was. I don’t have a crystal ball telling me if that gonna succeed, as it did with ISIS, or not.
Congratulations you seeded a grain of a doubt in the mind of a Random Internet Stranger, this might as well be counted as victory.
The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, curiously, is still around and still has its labor camps. It’s just doesn’t have any support (that I’ve heard for a while) from international interests, and no-one want to touch it. So yeah, this is an end result that can occur.
The point is not to win over random internet strangers, but to get as many people as possible at the same place in the dialog. Providing support and fair governance to a people to quell unrest is a centuries old COIN method. When we have the resources (in the case of Gaza, we have some that would absolutely help) the question is what the obstructions are getting them to the people so they can breathe easier. That usually comes down to political interests who want them to suffer for spite (we saw that with the George W. Bush administration and anything that looked remotely Arab or Muslim) and those who want them to be angry and violent. Sometimes there’s intersection between these.
Right now, here in the States, hate is deliberately being used to manipulate voters, and at the same time I think we can’t really call ourselves a unified society unless we’re at least trying to cooperate towards mutual benefit. And this informs my own bias.
First of all, you’re either ignorant or an idiot if you think what Israel is doing is “indiscriminate”.
More importantly, what’s your superior moral alternative when a force breaches borders, murders hundreds, and takes and holds hundreds more as hostages, and then retreats to the cover of hospitals and schools in a dense city?
More importantly, what’s your superior moral alternative when a force breaches borders, murders hundreds, and takes and holds hundreds more as hostages, and then retreats to the cover of hospitals and schools in a dense city?
Let’s do a little thought experiment here. Say that everything happened exactly as before except this time they retreated and hid inside Israeli hospitals and schools, on the Israeli side of the border, full of Israeli citizens. Do you think Israel would attack those terrorists in the same way?
Probably not, because those would be THEIR hospitals. There would be no tunnel system, no munitions stores, etc etc.
Your “gotcha” thought experiment is asking whether or not a country should treat the enemy country with equal caution to their own. Did you even consider it before asking it?
Does that force come from a people who’ve been deprived of everything, forced into a system of apartheid, robbed of their freedom and routinely bullied, tortured and killed for half a century?
That seems to be an important factor to just leave out of the equation.
Putting aside the lack of evidence of this, and the Israeli government’s history of being caught lying about this kind of thing, how many civilians is it defensible to kill per Hamas militant, and does the calculus change if they’re children?
…or are we taking the super credible IDF line and saying the infants are Hamas militants?
There isn’t a specific count. Just like there is no count for “how many Russian civilians has to die for each Ukrainian soldier”. Israel didn’t ask this war, Hamas did. Hamas is in charge of Gaza, not Israel.
You understand that the Israeli government funded Hamas over the PLO, don’t you? Netanyahu signed the death warrant on his own citizens to create the pretext for the genocide he’s now accelerating - Netanyahu and the Israeli government did ask for this war.
Okey that is a valid argument! Second one in a dozen of comments or so
Yes i know this mofo funded hamas and hope he ll pay for it. However, the attack on 7 October happened on Israeli territory, not the opposite. That’s still a “defensive operation” in my understanding.
I really don’t like this argument (defensive genocide? Come on.), but it’s one for Palestine in any case - look at the Israeli operation of Palestine as an open air concentration camp, and look at the casualty stats - between a dozen and five hundred Palestinian casualties per Israeli casualty, depending on your datasource and the way you slice it. This would justify the 7 October attack as defensive - which they weren’t.
Again, if you combine all that with the fact what Israel have backed the IDF, and the fact that Israel are a nuclear power with an advanced military, and f35s (compared to a paraglider and small-arms) how do you conclude that this is defensive?
I reject your second argument: the fact that one army is light years ahead of their opponent does not automatically make «offensive» whatever they do, nor does it mean that the advanced army should not fight at all. Good for them to be advanced
Regarding your first point, and the fact that there are so many civil victims for so «few» Israeli victims: agreed there are many. With some gotchas:
a non zero number of those civilians are only «civilians» because Hamas said so. It is a known fact they count their own fighters as «civilians». I do not deny that there are indeed, true civil victims. Israel has a record of letting people know where they attack in advance, so they do have some good will credit.
When you have a terrorist nest, next to your house, I think it’s pretty sensible to go in, and reduce their capacity to do harm. Most comments here reject even the fact that Israel had a right in first place to even enter the Gaza. I do believe they have total right to do so.
a genocide is a deliberate killing of civilians. Only Hamas deliberately targets civilians. IDF obviously could take more care in avoiding unnecessary death, but they don’t kill for fun as much as I know
It strikes to me that not as much pressure is put on Hamas for taking care of their citizen as it is on Israel. Hamas is ruling there, maybe Gaza’s citizens should somehow be involved in solving their problems?
I am not here to justify every death of every kid in Gaza, but I do say that Israel was provoked, and we are in «find out» phase of «fuck around», and yes, I reject the notion of «genocide»
a genocide is a deliberate killing of civilians. Only Hamas deliberately targets civilians. IDF obviously could take more care in avoiding unnecessary death, but they don’t kill for fun as much as I know
<span style="color:#323232;"> (a) Killing members of the group;
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
</span><span style="color:#323232;">
</span>
Sure seems like Israel is trying to get a full bingo card on this one even if you reject the notion of «genocide».
And before you go for the “intent” get out of jail free card…
Israel’s Public Diplomacy Minister: “Erase all of Gaza from the face of the earth. That the Gazan monsters will fly to the southern fence & try to enter Egyptian territory or they will die & their death will be evil.
Gaza should be erased!”
Still questioning a genocidal intent?
How about Bibi Netanyahu saying “You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible. 1 Samuel 15:3 ‘Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass’," .
Defense Minister Yoav Gallant called residents of Gaza, about half of whom are children, “human animals” as he ordered a “complete siege” on the enclave including a total blockade of food, fuel, and electricity.
Former military officer Eliyahu Yossian said the IDF must enter Gaza “with the aim of revenge, zero morality, maximum corpses,” and toldChannel 14 in Israel on Monday that “there is no population in Gaza, there are 2.5 million terrorists.”
Earlier this year, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said at an event in Paris, “There’s no such thing as Palestinians because there’s no such thing as a Palestinian people.” He also said the West Bank town of Huwara should be “wiped out” by “the state of Israel,” while Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu presented a map of what he called “The New Middle East”—without the illegally occupied West Bank, Gaza, or East Jerusalem—at the United Nations General Assembly just weeks before the onslaught in Gaza began.
Sure seems like a pattern of intent. I could find you that video of Bibi back in 2002 saying much the same if you like. This isn’t new.
the fact that one army is light years ahead of their opponent does not automatically make «offensive» whatever they do, nor does it mean that the advanced army should not fight at all. Good for them to be advanced
It speaks to their moral culpability, the irrelevance of Hamas’ genocidal intent, and the indefensible lack of proportionality in their response. I’m a 6’7" grown-ass man. If a 2 year old kicks me in the shin, after I’ve locked them in a cage and poked them aggressively with a stick, me beating their skull to a paste isn’t a defensible response - same applies to Israel.
a non zero number of those civilians are only «civilians» because Hamas said so. It is a known fact they count their own fighters as «civilians». I do not deny that there are indeed, true civil victims.
Similarly, Israel has been caught lying about who is a Hamas militant (they’re also making claims that every Palestinian is Hamas) - I don’t think you’re dumb or bad faith enough to argue this is at a level that changes things, so unless you’re going to argue otherwise, there’s not a point to engage here.
Israel has a record of letting people know where they attack in advance, so they do have some good will credit.
“Sure - I bombed all those schools, but I called on a bomb threat on a few of them first, so aren’t I really the good guy?” No.
When you have a terrorist nest, next to your house, I think it’s pretty sensible to go in, and reduce their capacity to do harm.
Can you define terrorist in a way that implicates Palestine and not Israel? I ask because Israel is killing far more innocent civilians than Hamas in addition to indiscriminately fucking over Palestine by cutting movement, trade, water, power, and rendering it uninhabitable with deadly consequences.
Killing members of the group; Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Only Hamas deliberately targets civilians.
No. Even if this were true, how many civilians are they killing per militant? 100:1? Knowing the proportion of kids killed is pretty squarely in line with the broader population, what makes you think they’re targeting Hamas? They’ve also killed 100 journalists and 48 aid workers. This is indefensible - please don’t try.
It strikes to me that not as much pressure is put on Hamas for taking care of their citizen as it is on Israel
Israel is responsible for Hamas - they propped them up over the PLO, created the oppressive conditions that would lead to sympathy for their goals - Fatah/the PLO would be in power if Israel didn’t decide to create the pretext for this genocide at the expense of Israeli lives. What would Palestine pushing back against Hamas look like when half the population are children? They’re not responsible for taking away Israel’s flimsy justification for driving them from their homes and slaughtering them.
I am not here to justify every death of every kid in Gaza, but I do say that Israel was provoked, and we are in «find out» phase of «fuck around», and yes, I reject the notion of «genocide»
That toddler kicked me after I tortured them, so I was justified in stomping their skull into a paste - fuck around and find out… What’s proportionality? You’re doing a lot of work to defend a genocide for someone that’s opposed to genocide - but you disagree with the UN on the definition, and think this is justified, so that shouldn’t come as a surprise.
up to 2005 UN, EU, America, Russia, Israel and a host of middle east intermediates like Qatar: provide aid to Gaza to encourage economic growth, is inevitably siphoned off by Hamas and others for military purposes
2006: UN, EU, America, Russia, Israel: “dear Hamas totes congrats on winning an election, wonder if you could abandon your pledge to genocide Israel and pick up the two state solution discussions where Fatah got up to? Else…y’know… we’ll have to cut aid and stuff coz that’s a bit terroristy”
Hamas: “Fuck you infidel! We look forward to strangling your children in their bed” incoherent yelling
UN, EU, America, Russia: deep sigh
Israel: cuts aid, blockades Gaza
Egypt: also blockades Gaza Yo you Hamas bois are batshit insane, no way we’re having an open border with you “Muslim brothers”…
Western social science students: why would Israel do this?
You have a bunch of genocidal dipshits welding small arms embedded in a civilian population, propped up by a genocidal nuclear power with a modern military and F-35s.
Which has the ability to deliver on that genocidal intent, and has been wiping out the other at a rate of between a dozen and five hundred to one over the past few decades?
Why did Israel prop up Hamas over the moderate, secular PLO, who wouldn’t murder Israelis?
It’s interesting how this leaves out 17 years of choking supplies of food and water to the civilian population of Gaza, the Israeli occupation and settlements in Gaza prior to 2005, the fact that that illegal occupation had been ongoing for 38 years despite international outcry, the naval blockade amounting to an act of war of its own, and really the whole broader context of the population of Gaza being displaced by ethnic cleansing by Israel since 1948.
Israel at least has a government and a democracy, and the government even has been somewhat honest with the NSO group and their crappy spyware tools - though I’m not sure why any of this needs to involve bombing hospitals or why “a functional democracy” has to be defended with such fervour, but hey at least we can hold onto the hope that democracy itself will mean that there will be a degree of accountability for those in power
Killing a building full of women and children to go after a group of people who may or may not be in said building after they killed women and children…
Two unscrupulous groups are willing to murder innocent civilians. Sounds like two groups of terrorists.
Fuck Hammas, fuck the IDF. I’m absolutely fine with them killing each other. I’m not okay with the fact that they’re both using innocent civilians as pawns.
The difference being the IDF has consistently gone to pretty significant lengths to warn civilians and give them time to evacuate. Hamas has not and in fact specifically targets civilians. These groups are not the same.
The difference being the IDF has consistently gone to pretty significant lengths to warn civilians and give them time to evacuate.
True, but then to bombard from the air destroying whole buildings and killing many civilians to get to a few combatants under the building is not an ethical or moral move either. You don’t get a get out of jail free card for notifying up front, you have to follow through.
Telling someone to evacuate is not enough, you have to verify they have evacuated. If they have not, you should be instead sending in ground troops, and yes with a larger cost in lives and political turmoil, but that is the ethical way.
Non-combatants are not supposed to be involved in combat.
Bullshit. There’s evidence of some warnings but with literally thousands of air strikes a week there literally isn’t the resources to warn everyone like they did during the “cease fire”. And you don’t get 10,000 civilians dead in a month by warning them.
We need a hell of a lot more evidence to support that than we’ve seen, it would still run into major problems with proportionality/distinction standards regarding all the civilians they killed in and around the hospital, and it wouldn’t make a scratch with regard to the other civilian infrastructure they’ve targeted.
Deep fried or fried sushi is definitely a thing and its real good if you are not a sushi purist. I think Russian sushi places like to do that, haven’t seen it quite so often outside of Russia though.
Theres a chain of all you can eat kinda fusion sushi bars around where I live. Trapper’s Sushi. Actually ate there today. I swear their best rolls are flash fried and smothered in various sauces or scallops with spicy mayo.
If you’re a sushi purist you’ll consider it a complete abomination but oh my sweet lord it’s sooo good.
Shrimp tempura roll is probably the gateway sushi roll for you then. That or maybe BBQ eel, which is also cooked and tastes delicious.
And the most important thing to remember is where you’re getting the sushi, and it’s freshness. If you’re buying grocery store sushi that’s been in the cooler since 7am, then yeah, it’s probably not gonna be great.
This is raw food we’re talking about, so you gotta be sure you’re going somewhere legit. At least that’s my opinion. You want to see them rolling it in front of you. If you go in regularly, the chef may even gift you with random dishes to try. It’s a cool experience.
But if you find a good place, man there’s nothing like a piece of high quality raw tuna. Taste, texture, everything. And I hate seafood in general. Cooked seafood, I guess. Traditional cooked fish is not my thing, but give me sushi any day.
And if you’re getting sushi rather than just sashimi, the rice is also SUPER important.
lemmy.world
Top