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.

magnusrufus

@[email protected]

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

magnusrufus ,

We still talking volcanos or have we moved on to regulating Taco Bell and porn?

magnusrufus ,

What gain does that bring Hamas? Comparing that to what gain it brings netanyahu it does seem like he’s more likely to blame.

magnusrufus ,

It’s sad that this will have no impact on the china simps.

It sucks even more that the victim was terrorized and that it’s entirely likely that their family will actually be retaliated against.

magnusrufus ,

Holy crap that’s spot on. I’m gonna be repeating that observation about Texans as it’s painfully true about the ones in my city.

magnusrufus ,

Animal torture sure makes you seems cool.

magnusrufus ,

Put monitoring software on his devices.

magnusrufus ,

Have part of his probation be having his property searched to check for such devices.

magnusrufus ,

Might want to checkout cyber security and pen testing. It’s not the same thing exactly but it kinda close in some regards.

magnusrufus ,

Nonsense hypotheticals are not whataboutism.

magnusrufus ,

That’s probably because it’s a line that gun control opponents use to try and minimize the obvious dangers and issues with guns. Make sure you are very clear about the scope of your observation and take into account the context you are introducing the observation and you won’t get yelled at…as much.

magnusrufus ,

The deal is the weird part where they made a specific point of and big deal out of the new classification not being a type of planet despite having the word planet in the name.

magnusrufus ,

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarf_star

That doesn’t seem to be entirely accurate.

magnusrufus ,

Well said. This is my take on it too. It’s really the only reasonable approach.

magnusrufus ,

You said that very incorrectly. It’s not solely about numbers but numbers are absolutely a fundamental factor.

magnusrufus ,

“why you think deaths were justified”

They didn’t say that.

magnusrufus ,

I have never witnessed any seller give any thought to wether the buy had a CCW or not.

magnusrufus ,

It does seem like a reasonable cya for selling to some one but I’ve just never seen it happen. The attitude around me tends to be indifference at best and more often contempt for performing any inquiries into the buyer’s eligibility.

magnusrufus ,

That you didn’t give a helpful answer makes me doubt you where as before I was interested in what you had to say.

Fake Photos, Real Harm: AOC and the Fight Against AI Porn (www.rollingstone.com)

In 2023, more deepfake abuse videos were shared than in every other year in history combined, according to an analysis by independent researcher Genevieve Oh. What used to take skillful, tech-savvy experts hours to Photoshop can now be whipped up at a moment’s notice with the help of an app. Some deepfake websites even offer...

magnusrufus ,

Treat the problem like cp. There is plenty to be done at this point. Not being able to fix it 100% doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to fix it at all.

magnusrufus ,

Sure you can. Cp is something that complicit people are still willing to share. Generating and distributing fake non consenting porn of people doesn’t need to be covered by the first amendment. Decide as a society that it’s fucking gross and should be illegal and then treat violations of the laws created against it harshly.

magnusrufus ,

Was cp never legal? Are you sure we haven’t made things illegal that we’re previously legal? People have this weirdly defeatist view about regulating ai deep fakes that doesn’t seem based on anything solid.

magnusrufus ,

Nah you haven’t really backed up with any solid reasoning. All laws have a date they were codified and enacted. Before that date the activities they covered were not yet illegal. Cp was at some point legal. Not long ago marital rape was perfectly legal. Now it’s not. Revenge porn laws are going into effect. You totally can take something awful that was legal and make it illegal. It might not be immediate, perfect, or without resistance but it can be done and has been done, even recently.

magnusrufus ,

I don’t think you are trying very hard to see beyond your defeatist position. The revenge porn example should land close enough to the mark for you to see that things that were legal can be made illegal. Even types of porn can be made illegal. So because it has literally been done before, yes you can totally do it.

Also yes the centuries ago interpretation is fine. Still shows taking something that was legal and making illegal.

magnusrufus ,

No and you are not engaging honestly at this point.

magnusrufus ,

You are usually better than this. I did give you a perfectly applicable recent example of a type of porn being made illegal but you are ignoring it and misrepresenting my argument, after getting touchy about words being put in your mouth. You requesting multiple times and then choosing to ignore the valid response is a failing on your part.

magnusrufus ,

No I don’t mean cp. I mean revenge porn, like I’ve mentioned multiple times. Are you reading what you are disagreeing with?

“So your example was not a solid one as you claim.” If you’re going to act haughty you ought to at least be right.

magnusrufus ,

Those are pretty good concerns. Wonder if meta data about the model used and the prompt data could be required to address the issue of intent. I do think that accidental downloading would have to be an exception but if it’s clearly labelled/advertised I think that downloading could still be targeted.

magnusrufus ,

You think that Polaroids that were supposed to stay private were not shared? Thanks for finally reading the posts btw. Also what does pretending that revenge porn only existed for two years get you in this case? Taking it as true, it shows that a rapid response to recently emergent social issue can occur and that laws can be enacted to outlaw the offensive but previously legal porn. It makes my point even more applicable.

magnusrufus ,

Outlawing cp doesn’t stop it from being produced or hosted in other countries so we should give up on that too? Or should we sensibly keep a law against it on the books, build an international broad consensus to work against it, and apply political pressure to the countries that won’t cooperate?

“There is plenty to be done at this point. Not being able to fix it 100% doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to fix it at all.”

“It might not be immediate, perfect, or without resistance but it can be done”

Republicans are shitheads for sure but if nonconsensual ai porn presented to them with the right degree of moral panic they could accidentally do the right thing.

magnusrufus ,

I’d say for the sake of not jailing the innocent that letting the ones that can plausibly deny beat the charges is what we’d have to accept. I think that requiring that meta data would certainly be a significant new requirement but it doesn’t necessarily make it an overreach. I believe that pornography production has to provide verification of the age of their participants and every porn site has some legal statement about the age of the people depicted. Categorize the meta data requirements similarly.

magnusrufus ,

So you feel this way about all progressive policies? Like gun control? In the face of opposition don’t try.

magnusrufus ,

So given the purely obstructionist nature of Republicans what is left for Dems to do?

magnusrufus ,

Hard to work on getting more democrats elected when the proposed platform is we won’t do anything because the republicans will just say no.

magnusrufus ,

For winning voters it is.

magnusrufus ,

Over not trying at all, yes.

magnusrufus ,

Because “we are wasting your money” is false. They are either getting paid to try to advance progressive issues or they are getting paid to sit in their asses and promise to try once they have enough people. That they fail every time it’s false too. Also assuming that putting up no fight doesn’t hurt things is incorrect. Just letting the issue go and letting it become the new normal makes it harder to gain momentum on later.

magnusrufus ,

You think that drafting no bills and promising to do it later is going to win more seats and not lose them?

magnusrufus ,

Dude the topic has been drifting for quite a while. You going to act like “getting more Dems” doesn’t have a cost? You going to admit all the things you’ve blown past? Your proposal is to have them not do a major component of their job and instead focus on flipping seats blue. The money they get paid as elected officials gets paid either way. Either course of action costs money, doing the proper prep work for bills or campaigning. That famously so-cheap-it’s-near-as-free campaigning. They will need to not only justify to their own voters keeping them elected during your do nothing policy but also convince other voters to elect more do-nothings.

Hold yourself to your own standards.

magnusrufus ,

Isn’t shooting deer to manage their population culling?

magnusrufus ,

So it is culling?

magnusrufus ,

It seems like you are avoiding acknowledging that shooting deer for population management is culling. So someone did at some point talk about it. Right?

There is a postulate. The postulate is that shooting is the course of action to be taken to achieve population management.

magnusrufus ,

So what is the distinction that makes shooting deer not culling?

I did talk about the argument at hand.

“There is a postulate. The postulate is that shooting is the course of action to be taken to achieve population management.”

Deer population control is necessary but shooting deer is not the only way to achieve it. I think it’s the only practical way but it’s not the only way. The postulate, or premise of a train of reasoning, that you proposed was hunting deer and commendably not wasting what could be harvested from them. Go with the denotation.

Kids these days indeed.

magnusrufus ,

You know for some that seems to get pretty upset about people ignoring major points or conversations you do it a lot.

What is the distinction that makes shooting deer not culling?

Shooting deer, ya know? LIke you were talking about before you linked deer management.

The capital of Montana is Helena. That’s a fact. Verifiable, irrefutable, fact. Thought I’d mention that since you keep stating facts that no one is trying to refute.

magnusrufus ,

Cool so shooting deer, like you where originally mentioning, does count as culling. And the type of population management that you started the conversation with is shooting deer. So when you said that no one was talking about culling that was nonsense wasn’t it? Because you were talking about culling.

Culling is an option for population management, one that you brought up and the one that the joke was referencing, but as you said yourself culling isn’t the only option of population management. Strange that you didn’t mention any other methods to manage population. Was that because you were pulling it out of your ass too?

Now you still seem confused. I’m not saying that deer management is not necessary. I’m not saying that culling is the only method. I did say that it is the most practical but I don’t think your reading skills caught that. Since you think offering an alternative method is important for some reason then how about sterilization? Wildly impractical but that would do the trick.

You are making the case that because it’s a fact that deer must be managed and that shooting them is the major practical method to achieve that goal, that it’s a good thing or at least a necessary thing to shoot deer. Shooting deer to manage the population. That’s a postulate. The line of reasoning that takes you from acknowledging a problem to selecting a solution. The hypothesis advanced as a premise of a train of thought.

Would you like to keep cranking up the hostility?

magnusrufus ,

“No-one has talked about culling at any point.” As in you literally said that.

If I took a side it was the side that culling is the practical method of managing deer. You assumed that I was disagreeing with you when I was just pointing out that you misunderstood that person.

Work on your reading skills because I did give you an example of an “other way”. Additionally work on your reasoning skills because me providing another way is off topic. And you already said yourself that culling was not the only way to manage deer population. You are contradicting yourself. You have to pick if you acknowledge that there are other ways, like you said previously or if you think that you have made some great point now about how there is no other conceivable way.

The postulate is that shooting deer is the practical acceptable solution to managing deer population. The necessity of deer management being a fact is closely related but distinct from making the connection to a method.

Read. I did give an alternative.

You thought I was disagreeing with you when I wasn’t. I’ve said from the start that deer culling is the practical way to manage deer population and that harvesting their meet is the commendable thing to do along with it. Calm down. Read. Learn to behave in a civil manner, especially if you want to go about implying other people are acting like kids.

magnusrufus ,

Actually if you think you are making a valid coherent point please go into further detail. As I see it what they call or don’t call what they eat doesn’t change what it fundamentally is. Shark food is animals. Translate that into shark if you like but the meaning doesn’t change.

magnusrufus ,

What does that have to do with what constitutes food? Food is what is eaten for sustenance. Sharks eat animals. No they don’t reflect on the morality of it but that has nothing to do with the reality that sharks eat animals for food. Animals are food. When you talk all carnivores and parasites and such out of feeding on animals then we can say that animals are not food. Us having the capacity and the will to be morally selective about our choice of food doesn’t make animals not food.

magnusrufus ,

It does? It does what?

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