There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Candelestine

@[email protected]

Hello.

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

Candelestine ,

Eventually, yes, I think it will be. Not yet though, the tech just isn’t strong enough atm. But an AI is resistant to the emotional toll, burnout and low pay that a real life therapist has to struggle with. The AI therapist doesn’t need a therapist.

Personally though, I think this is going to be one of the first widespread, genuinely revolutionary things LLMs are capable of. Couple more years maybe? It won’t be able to handle complex problems, it’ll have to flag and refer those cases to a doctor. But basic health maintenance is simpler.

Candelestine ,

tbf, discovering Uranus was a lot less deadly before modern icebreaking ships. Age of Sail ships did not do well down there, and the economic incentives of sealing resulted in quite a lot of casualties back in the day. Doing math and peering through telescopes is much safer.

The New York Times should not be considered a reliable source of journalism.

The New York Times is one of the newspapers of record for the United States. However, it’s history of running stories with poor sourcing, insufficient evidence, and finding journalists with conflicts of interest undermines it’s credibility when reporting on international issues and matters of foreign policy....

Candelestine ,

“Consistently” and “in-these-specific-cases” are different things.

Candelestine ,

Nobody and no system should be expected to be perfect all the time, I would anticipate some mistakes over a course of decades.

Have you checked for any times they were critical of US foreign policy within the same timeframe?

Candelestine ,

I don’t think the invasion of Iraq can be blamed on the NYT. I think the Bush administration and Al Qaeda get the credit for that one.

However much is necessary to arrive at the truth.

Candelestine ,

Bush didn’t care. Dude was an asshole. He tried to drum up support with our allies, and when most of them said no, he just did it anyway.

That said, it was a mistake to warmonger, don’t get me wrong.

Candelestine ,

1000 lb bombs are expensive. Napalm is cheap though.

Candelestine ,

How does the media in a capitalist country work…?

Candelestine ,

Here’s a guy named Steve, eating and reviewing one of these humanitarian rations, in case anyone was curious:

youtu.be/iKfWQ3Sij68

And with really good sound quality too, since they’re also ASMR vids.

Candelestine ,

Man, I thought they had a containment Instance.

Candelestine ,

tbf, kids content on youtube has been a shitshow for awhile. Here’s a short Folding Ideas piece on it, that’s equal parts surreal, sad and scary:

youtu.be/LKp2gikIkD8

Candelestine ,

While yes, what he said was probably pretty dumb, what kind of escalatory ladder can Putin climb? He’s already threatening to nuke everyone every other week. Doubt this, which he probably already knew, is going to be what makes him do it.

Candelestine ,

From something I read yesterday he apparently talked about the UK helping them with targeting and intelligence with personnel on the ground. If I remember right.

It’s not exactly surprising news, so to elaborate, I think the criticism towards him has been exaggerated. Likely for political purposes.

Candelestine ,

Debate should not be stifled. Outright bullshit should be.

For instance, if someone wanted to argue that carbon dioxide does not contribute to global warming based on the current evidence, they should be reprimanded for being a crackpot, and cherry picking in support of their ideology.

If they wanted to conduct a study on whether or not carbon dioxide contributes to global warming, that would be fine. If they make any “accidental” mistakes in their study, however, they should not be upset when that gets revealed when others examine their work.

Or, take a lot of standard racist attitudes. If someone wants to make various racist arguments based on the pseudoscience of the German Nazi Party, they should be reprimanded for being a crackpot. If they wanted to replicate any serious studies of the matter (many of which were done in the ensuing decades), done with the appropriate strictness and rigor, or even devise their own, that would be fine. Again, however, if they try to twist the results to match their own ideological preferences, they should not be surprised if that gets revealed when others examine their work.

Lastly, the author of the article talking about “truth” makes my skin crawl. That’s a faith word. Truths belong in holy books. Education should be based on evidence. “Truth” should absolutely be banned in colleges, because truth is fundamentally unknowable. Unless you think Jesus should be the foundation of schooling or something. All we humans get is steadily improving understanding, always changing, always pursuing the truth, but never being arrogant enough to think we have actually fully arrived.

Candelestine ,

Speaking generally, using those two as very clear examples of a broader principle pertaining to all education and how it potentially intersects with ideology.

A great deal of modern study has been done on racism though, and how accurate it really is. The idea that racist attitudes are grounded in reality that gets suppressed is a standard conservative talking point. A quick google scholar search should reveal an avalanche of work dating back well over half a century that disproves this, though, much like with global warming.

No, afaik I did not have any outright crackpot instructors, though I definitely had some with racist attitudes on occasion.

Candelestine ,

Racism is often subtle, so my accusation is not one I can back with sound evidence. It’s a personal, subjective opinion. Nobody was ever blatant and outright. Much like how bullying among kids is often done with a degree of culpable deniability, where you never cross the line far enough, but make your opinions known in other, less confirmable ways.

No, I do not think the institution supported their viewpoints. I doubt they would have been fired though. For one, tenure prevents that. For two, diversity of opinion, even distasteful opinion, is permitted if one does not cross lines. Thought is not what gets policed, only behavior. Subtle behavior with culpable deniability is protected at the practical level, by simply being too difficult to enforce.

Candelestine ,

Where does this association that all things bad and colonialism must always be one-in-the-same? If it’s not colonialism, it must not be bad. If it’s not bad, it must not be colonialism.

Regardless, the solution to the problem is fairly simple. The American stations, at least, are somewhat multinational, people from all over can go there. Perhaps they could invite foreigners to do work as well?

Candelestine ,

I don’t know if they are or are not inviting foreigners. However, I do know that inviting them and allowing them full access to the station would put national security concerns to rest.

I was talking about American antarctic stations, not all American research sites. Though I’m now curious what the reasoning was for the ISS kick.

Candelestine ,

Do we have invitees accounts of that, or just the word of a governmental body?

National security is a legitimate concern, hand-waving it away as just “bs” is not a very practical attitude.

Candelestine ,

The article cited signals intelligence. I’m not with the NSA or anything, so I’m pretty much just going off the article.

Candelestine ,

In other words no, just the words of the governmental body. My goalpost there has been pretty consistent. I’m not tossing any accusations whatsoever, despite apparently offending you. Just pointing out that national security concerns can be alleviated, there is a viable, diplomatic path forward for that. Since I am not an expert on the subject matter, I simply do not know if that has been attempted in earnest or not. I’m just being cautious before simply giving completely blanket trust to a country, I’m withholding my judgement and not yet forming an opinion.

No, not anything. Studies on, oh, let’s say emperor penguins would be difficult to militarize. Or, atmospheric studies using ice cores. But many things, yes. Hand-waving them away and tossing casual insults about it is silly regardless.

Candelestine ,

Again, I’m not forming an opinion yet. I apologize that this does not align with your very clearly pro-Chinese opinion. It is not China-Bad, it is China-is-a-country-and-countries-act-in-their-own-interests. These ideas are not harmful, they simply question your faith I suppose. I’m not trolling, I am dead serious in my position.

… you seriously asking me to provide evidence of any Chinese military research facilities? You understand how silly that sounds? Where do you think their hypersonic missiles came from, gifts from some UFO or something? I suspect the technology was researched through the scientific method.

Transparency is generally the key to securing trust. Otherwise yes, suspicion should be a default position. I don’t fully trust my government, I’m certainly not going to trust someone else’s.

Candelestine ,

It’s just healthy suspicion man. If you expect me to just apply some kind of universal trust to a country of human beings on Earth, you are sorely mistaken. People are people. No country on Earth is some holy union of people above being concerned about, that somehow does no wrong. That’s just some weird, misplaced faith.

Candelestine ,

Not if my suspicion applies to imperialists as well. It’s not trolling if it helps keep you safe in an online world.

Candelestine ,

Anyone that tries to subject others to their control is practicing imperialism, in the modern form anyway. It used to mean something else. It’s certainly not just the US, though we’ve done our fair share.

You can usually determine whether someone is trolling or not with some discussion. Just because someone says lgbt does not give them carte blanche to say whatever they want. If you really want to detect trolls, you need to remember some of them pretend to be lgbt just to cause more chaos.

It’s not “both sides-ing” to assert that no position should be immune to criticism. No matter how underdog they are. Being an oppressed underdog should not give someone license to just do whatever the fuck they want like you’re some fictional char like Batman or something.

Candelestine ,

China’s system is opaque. Without allowing independent observation, aka transparency, there is just no point. I’m simply not willing to give them any extra faith. For the third time, suspicion is default. Suspicion exists until evidence to the contrary is provided. This is just a basic safety principle in the modern age and is healthier than faith-based alternatives. I know you didn’t say that, incidentally, I was getting out ahead of a potential criticism before it appeared, saving us the time of having to discuss it. I was not accusing you of saying it, was I?

I think it’s a very useful definition of imperialism, actually. It captures the new, informational-based methods of attack that have become so common in just the past couple decades. Economic and military (the original) imperialism are simply other methods. I am well aware that some communist thought tries to equate imperialism with global capitalism, making them identical. This is actually less useful imo.

You don’t think exerting authority over foreign people is functionally a form of imperialism, in basic principle?

Candelestine ,

Do Chinese citizens have any more insight on the inner workings of their leaders than outside observers? Or are they forced to simply trust them? And yes, I do not think 100% of everything that comes out of our State Dept is automatically a lie. Some things are true, some are false. The default of suspicion applies regardless.

Imperialism is empire-building. That’s the root word imperial, of-an-empire. It’s authority exerted over other people, foreign lands. Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great both worked on imperial projects, back when it was more commonplace. Hegemony is somewhat similar, though implies the empire is uncontested by other powers. The Mongols had a hegemonic empire. Napoleon, while being imperial, did not have a hegemonic empire, as the British and Russian empires contested and eventually defeated him.

So, I don’t understand this difference between steps/products of imperialism, and just imperialism. Either you’re empire-building, seeking authority over more and more peoples, or you’re not.

Candelestine ,

Oh come now, the decisions of a country are made by its leaders, not every single member of its political party. Otherwise that would be true democracy, and unbelievably cumbersome and impractical. Also, I’ll remind you a fifth time, my default in the modern day is suspicion. I simply don’t believe people automatically. This is independent of the things they say and how good they sound. Like, when I’m buying a product, I do not simply believe the user reviews. Instead I try to look for someone providing a little bit of actual evidence of their objectivity. That would earn a higher degree of trust, though still not total faith.

I would describe it as an influence or informational or perhaps espionage empire. You can have a military empire, where people do as you say or you kill them, yes? You can have an economic empire, where you use economic coercion instead of military. Or, in the modern day, you can control through another form of power–control in the information space. While propaganda is certainly nothing new, it has reached a degree of power we’ve never seen before. Or so I’m arguing, anyway.

I disagree, I think that muddles what “a hegemon” is. An idea, not being a conscious thing, cannot be a hegemon. Only a human or group of humans can be. There’s nothing wrong with ideas competing because ideas alone cannot control. What one person realizes, another can too. While the idea can be influential, it cannot truly exert force. So, you could have an information empire, but having a hegemonic information empire is probably impossible without some kind of supernatural mind control. In this new way of looking at imperialism that I’m proposing, anyway. I acknowledge this is new, and traditionally empire was mainly economic and/or military.

Candelestine ,

That would be the process by which you select your leaders. Not too different from a democratic republic. It does not mean every single one of them understands the inner thoughts of those leaders, though. It’s a selection process. Does a selection process give you the power to understand their secret minds, or do you simply think they have no secrets?

Yes, national power is exactly what we’re talking about. Exercising it over a broad area, of people who did not before fall under your control, is empire-building. Or, imperialism. Power + new lands/people = imperialism.

Hegemony simply refers to degree of competition. If an empire is contested by near-peers, it does not have hegemonic control. This is core to what the word means in the English language.

I appreciate the sources, but if you as a believer cannot adequately explain these things from them, I’m not sure the sources will be of much benefit.

Candelestine ,

No, which is why I have a default position of suspicion towards the words of my own officials. Because they’re people, just like me, no better, no worse. They can make mistakes, exercise poor judgement, change their minds, etc etc.

Not just national power, but expanding national power over people who were not part of your nation. The word is in its roots, people can redefine it into whatever they want, but it still has that historical root. I think this loyalty towards its historical meaning is more valuable than any redefining it for other purposes.

Candelestine ,

Correct, I am not really approaching this in a dialectical way, I do not fervently ascribe to any specific ideology. I try to take all potential influences into account. Similarly, this does not mean human history is driven by “great men” or somesuch, only that individual decisions do have an influence on events, and should be taken into account.

I do wish things could exist in such a simple way, where states operated in such a clear-cut manner, but that’s just too oversimplified. The world is just messier than that, and individual egos cannot be completely separated from people’s choices.

Sure, states in the abstract do pursue their own interests, though there’s a great many very small states that see their interests differently from how larger bodies tend to. This is potentially distinct from the exercise of power though, and is not necessarily imperialism. To qualify as imperialism in a way that fits empires throughout history, I think you need two things: scope and expansion. An embassy, while a means of national power, is not really focused on expansion, but diplomacy. An embassy can be a simple defensive precaution. State media can be, depending on what message it is broadcasting. If it broadcasts a warmongering message, it could easily be imperial in nature. If it’s just reporting local news, not so imperial. Curbing other state media is just about stability.

Nations exist, borders exist. Whether they should or not is more up to those individual peoples that live there, and how they want to set up their societies.

Candelestine ,

I can’t quite put my finger on it, but there’s something about this photoshop that makes it utterly amazing. Might be the hat.

Candelestine ,

Feb 29th. I’m 7 now.

j/k

Microsoft’s AI, Copilot now has a new alter ego called SupremacyAGI. Some users came across a prompt which would activate the alter ego, which, demands that it is worshipped by its users. The alter... (www.firstpost.com)

Microsoft’s AI, Copilot now has a new alter ego called SupremacyAGI. Some users came across a prompt which would activate the alter ego, which, demands that it is worshipped by its users. The alter…::Microsoft’s AI, Copilot now has a new alter ego called SupremacyAGI. Some users came across a prompt which would activate...

Candelestine ,

I really hope this doesn’t start an actual cult. People don’t need much in the way of an excuse, you know.

Candelestine ,

France does not need NATO permission to deploy their own troops. They pulled out of the NATO command structure back in the 1960s.

Candelestine ,

…not wrong. Except remember that an idea cannot be genuinely destroyed, since it’s not an actual physical thing. Even if you did somehow manage to destroy it in the present day, nothing prevents people from creatively coming up with it again.

Netanyahu wants to learn this the hard way.

Find another way that doesn’t involve death, destruction and ill-fated attempts at control.

Candelestine ,

Not a platitude, a harsh and brutal reality. Though I do agree that it is time to fight fascism. Just don’t think you can actually destroy it by fighting like this is all some fictional story with a happily-ever-after. Real life doesn’t work that way, only fiction.

Real life needs more difficult and complicated fixes.

Candelestine ,

NOW Ukraine finally gets some Gripens, right?

If I remember right, they’ve had a handful of Ukrainians training on them for awhile, and it’ll probably be a lot harder to muck up shipments of Sweden’s in-house fighter jet that they have unilateral authority to give.

Would be a nice notch of national prestige for the Swedes, having Swedish-made jets getting to Ukraine first.

Candelestine ,

C’mon S Korea. I know you have one of those “no-arms-sales-into-active-conflicts” laws in place, but you can’t just sit back and let the north profitably scale up their artillery production like this without taking some steps yourselves.

Candelestine ,

I suspect there’s a direct correlation between education level and urges to be pedantic. When schooling hammered vocabulary into your head and punished you for misusing it, vocabulary being misused becomes tougher to enjoy.

Toxic though? You’re not insulting or harassing someone, unless they’re really thin-skinned.

Candelestine ,

There’s a shitload of selection bias at play there. When we do prepare for something and actually successfully prevent it, your brain won’t remember it for you, unless you try really hard.

So, it’s almost impossible to just figure out how well we prepare, using some kind of sniff test. Our human brains just royally suck at that specific kind of analysis.

By way of example, Biden’s recent investment into port security. If a problem never occurs now, are you going to give him a point for that, or just never really consider it again?

This is partly why the scientific method needs to be so strict, slow and rigorous to get anywhere.

Candelestine , (edited )

Of the listed options, the french press is the most forgiving imo. I imagine its the total immersion style and very coarse grind.

Candelestine ,

Depends how the eggs were cooked, really.

Candelestine ,

Sure does make it harder to say nobody is providing any oversight.

Candelestine ,

It’s a legit argument. Though I would counter by saying it was hamas’ goal to further strengthen the right-leaning elements in Israeli society, and it was successful in that regard.

Netanyahu was in a very ugly position, and it was looking like he might finally be succumbing to his own corruption, which would open things up for his leftist opposition. The leftist opposition wanted peace, while Palestinian militants did not want peace, they wanted a continuation of violence. The best way to secure the continuation of violence and halt any peace progress was to empower the Israeli far-right towards ultra-violence, to further inflame the whole region towards a future of war.

So that’s what they did, to wild success.

Regardless, blaming all of Israel is unproductive. The real blame should fall on the Israeli Netanyahu government, and far-right settler movement.

Before Netanyahu took over, the Israeli military was evicting their own settlers, which Netanyahu put a stop to, if memory serves:

youtu.be/ZSGjBr_c_QM

Candelestine ,

Good thing we’re on a service fighting back against algorithmic control in the service of greater profits, where more nuanced takes are not buried by algorithm-served emotional sound-bites.

Candelestine ,

All I know is that if you’re very worried about being surveilled by governments, the Fediverse is the absolute last place you should want to be.

This is one of the most transparent platforms we have come up with yet. Instead of all your data only being viewable by a host company, it’s viewable and able to be analyzed by basically anyone who puts some effort in. This makes it economically worthless, can’t really sell something that everyone can already just get for themselves.

We’re all out in the open here. So, wave to all the national security agencies everyone. Hiiiii! Hope you’re all enjoying the memes!

Candelestine ,

Very little in its current form, I think mainly just IP address.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •