Hey bby. How’d that work out?

To be fair, Meta is the only US based AI player that open sources their models. Fuck meta in general, but it’s hard to say that they are wholly opposed to open source.

I look forward to Republicans in the House holding hearings to get to the bottom of this. Because Republicans held hearings when they accused social media of censoring conservative opinions. Because Republicans care about free speech. And even though this effects free speech of the other party, Republicans still care about free speech, right? Republicans will hold social media companies accountable for any censorship of political speech, right? Guys? There are going to be hearings right? Well, at least if not journalists are going to press those committee members about the inconsistency, right? Journalists will surely do their jobs. Right guys?

Growing up, if you had told me half or more of America would end up elevating a rapist to the presidency and prostrating themselves at his feet, I’d have laughed you out of the room. This nation has sunk LOW.

Bill Clinton won reelection. Now, granted, he was not Trump levels, he was a piece of shit who at the very least abused his role and power over women. Now, even after me too, he’s a beloved elder statesman. Just saying, the nation has sunk lower, but I don’t know that’s a lot lower than where we were when we were kids.

If that was Biden’s motivation, then where is Fauci’s pardon? Or Adam “Enemy from Within” Schiff’s pardon? Or what about Liz Chenney who is supposed to face treason charges according to Trump, where is her pardon? What about Jack Smith, where is his pardon? Kash Patel has an appendix in his book which is a literal enemies and prosecution list, any pardons for anyone on that list?

If Biden was concerned about the Trump justice department going after his political enemies, and Biden wanted to protect those people, there’s probably 80+ pardons he should be handing out.

But instead he only issued one. For his son. So Biden is either actually concerned about overreach of the Trump justice department but he’s only willing to save his son, and leave everyone else hanging. Or, Biden isn’t actually that concerned with the Trump justice department and is just abusing his pardon power to protect his shithead son from the consequences of his own actions. Either way, fuck Joe Biden.

“There is international pressure and it’s growing, but particularly when the international pressure rises, we must close ranks, we need to stand together against the attempts to stop the war,” he said.

Sorry, why is Isreal not an isolated state at this point? If they won’t respond to international pressure, and indeed are intent on doubling down because of that international pressure, why even include them in international bodies?

Some are, sure. But others have to do with the weight. The most interesting rationals for returning it are because it’s shit as a productivity tool. So if you can’t really use it for work, there aren’t many games on it, then why are you keeping it? At that point it’s just a TV that only you can watch (since it doesn’t support multiple user profiles).

Google scanned millions of books and made them available online. Courts ruled that was fair use because the purpose and interface didn’t lend itself to actually reading the books in Google books, but just searching them for information. If that is fair use, then I don’t see how training an LLM (which doesn’t retain the exact copy of the training data at least in the vast majority of cases) isn’t fair use. You aren’t going to get an argument from me.

I think most people who will disagree are reflexively anti AI, and that’s fine. But I just haven’t heard a good argument that AI training isn’t fair use.

Removed by mod

I quoted the IDF spokesperson, who said nothing about crossfire or active combat, just fighting “in the area.” And that’s the IDF, who doesn’t have a great track record with honesty. Your just making shit up trying to find some way to justify indescriminate use of force. Even your made up scenarios, what rules of engagement would allow soilders to fire on unnarmed people just because they were running? If the IDF had any manner of restraint they wouldn’t immediately target people without assessing whether or not they were an actual threat, which these civilians clearly weren’t. They don’t, because there are no consequences for IDF killing civilians, except in this one instance because those civilians happened to be Israeli.

Bullshit.

The army’s chief spokesman, Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari, says Israeli troops found the hostages Friday and erroneously identified them as a threat. He said it was not clear if they had escaped their captors or been abandoned.

They were seen and shot, this was not during active combat or crossfire. They were alone. They were unarmed. They posed no threat to the IDF. And they were targeted and killed because the IDF has no qualms with targeting and killing civilians. They just killed their own civilians this time.

The army’s chief spokesman, Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari, says Israeli troops found the hostages Friday and erroneously identified them as a threat. He said it was not clear if they had escaped their captors or been abandoned.

So, this wasn’t an oopsie with crossfire. This was, IDF found three people and killed them. I think the implication is these three were alone and very likely unarmed. It’s hard to imagine how they could have been perceived as a “threat” by troops. If the hostages has noticed the IDF troops at all, they were probably coming toward them with hands up to be rescued. And the IDF fired on them.

This just goes to show how indescriminate the IDF is. “Perceived as a threat” just means “perceived to be Palestine.” There are no rules of engagement, just this time it bit the IDF in the ass.

Whew that’s a wild statement. I don’t think literally anybody on the planet believes that, and I think saying something like that would make even paid Israeli officials who deal professionally is spouting propoganda blush with shame.

I can only imagine what has gone wrong in your life that you’d be so uniformed about the situation in Gaza, and yet so compelled to shovel the most exaggerated propaganda on the Internet for strangers to downvote. I hope your a paid shill, I truly do. Because if not, then there is likely a lot of trauma behind that screen of yours and I sincerely hope you seek help. Arguing on the Internet isn’t going to fix the pain your dealing with, friend. Log off, take a deep look at yourself and your life, and maybe go find someone to talk to about it. Wishing you luck on your road to recovery from whatever got you to this sad point in your life.

Alright youve convinced me, I’m a sucker for drama

Whenever I come across YouTube drama I’m always a little sad that I’m out of the loop and can’t participate in whatever is going on and tempted to go down a rabbit hole to figure it out, but then I realize my ignorance has saved me probably hundreds of hours of time that would otherwise be wasted worrying and arguing about things that haven’t the slightest impact on my life. Still, for my sake, enjoy your drama guys.

Sacrifice your soldiers today for potential enemy soldiers in the future, while you’re at war and under attack by said enemy? Great plan.

My plan is to comply with international humanitarian law. It is a great plan. Its an awesome fucking plan in fact.

You’re suggesting Israel should have to keep open supply lines open for enemy forces.

And here you acknowledge the cage.

Embargoing and cutting off your supplies from a hostile force is pretty standard when it comes to warfare.

2.1 million Palestinians are a hostile force? Also its literally a requirement of international humanitiarian law

IHL provides that civilians under the power of enemy forces must be treated humanely in all circumstances, without any adverse distinction. They must be protected against all forms of violence and degrading treatment, including murder and torture. Moreover, in case of prosecution, they are entitled to a fair trial affording all essential judicial guarantees. The protection of civilians extends to those trying to help them, in particular medical units and humanitarian or relief bodies providing essentials such as food, clothing and medical supplies. The warring parties are required to allow access to such organizations. The Fourth Geneva Convention and Additional Protocol I specifically require belligerents to facilitate the work of the ICRC. While IHL protects all civilians without discrimination, certain groups are singled out for special mention. Women and children, the aged and sick are highly vulnerable during armed conflict. So too are those who flee their homes and become internally displaced or refugees. IHL prohibits forced displacements by intimidation, violence or starvation.>

Your literally defending war crimes buddy. Maybe take a look in the mirror.

I was specifically referring to the 2021 elections and Israel’s refusal to allow East Jerusalem to vote after Israel annexed the territory. But you probably knew that. Palestinians dislike Hamas, an election likely would have removed them from power, but Israel gave Hamas the bullshit excuse it needed to stay in power. Great job!

Hamas has made it clear they will not surrender or negotiate for a viable peace

I don’t know if you have reading comprehension problems or were specifically ignoring the point, but I was explicitly talking about what comes after Hamas. You have 2.1 million people in a cage for decades. You cut off their food and water for weeks, kill 10,000 people, over half children, and you think even after you kill every Hamas leader and solider that the citizens that left are just going to go back to living in their cage without human rights? This is something the US learned in Afghanistan, you kill one civilian, you create two new terrorists. The same will happen here. Unless, of course, your intention was to lump all Palestinians under the label of “Hamas”, in which case consider your true colors seen!

I suspect for this reason we’re probably going to see a forcible regime change and/or some annexation in Gaza very soon.

I also agree that Israel intends to engage in illegal ethnic cleansing. Glad we’re on the same page about that at least.

Sacrificing significant numbers of your own soldiers to save enemy civilians sounds noble

It sounds consistent with the international laws of war. Everything you listed, especially being politically unpopular, is not a legitimate consideration for the use of military force against civilian populations. Under international law, the party using force must weigh the expected military advantage against the anticipated harm to civilians and civilian objects. If the same objective could be achieved via a means less harmful to civilians, that is the required option. Maybe you don’t give a shit about international law, Israel never has. It is also completely disingenuous to frame loss of IDF soldiers on the battlefield as some “win” for Hamas or a risk to Israel’s security. Hamas is terrorist organization fighting with soviet era junk and homemade rockets going up against a nation-state backed by the US. IDF losses would be in the hundreds at most in the worst conditions.

They certainly aren’t trying to maximize civilian casualties…At very least it’s obvious they want to minimize the blowback from the media

Now that’s just silly. Israel doesn’t care about the media. The Israeli UN ambassadors were wearing gold stars to protest the overwhelming UN resolution calling for a humanitarian cease fire, and Israel got called out by the Holocaust Musuem for the tactic. Israel does not care about media criticism. But you are right, they are not trying to maximize civilian casualties. They are trying to inflict maximum suffering as a means of ethnic cleansing.

See the link in my above post for detailed info and examples of how Hamas intentionally uses human shields and puts their bases in and under hospitals, churches, mosques, etc.,

Your link is nearly 10 years out of date. Also, there’s no “its ok to bomb entire neighborhoods if a enemy combatant has a home in the neighborhood so is therefore using human shields” exception to the international law of war obligation to protect civilians. Not even if you, like Israel, view Palestinians as subhuman and not deserving of basic rights.

These countries are at war with each other,

There are not two countries at war. There is one country, Israel. This is an anti-terrorism operation, by definition.

and someone currently on your side today is better for your national interests than someone who might potentially be on your enemy’s side in the future.

That’s just some cold ass shit. Really all about wining those hearts and minds. At any rate, its a violation of international law so ok.

Would you enthusiastically join them in such an incursion, without air support, to save enemy civilians who are likely to support said enemy?

Ah this old chesnut, how lazy. I could easily ask the same thing to you - would you enthusiastically support your country bombing civilian neighborhood because there might be an enemy combatant in a tunnel underneath the homes? Really waiving the flag after that one?

How about the cutting off food and water for millions of people? That’s a legitimate thing to do, right?

Hamas has a leader in a tunnel under a refugee camp. You can 1) go into the tunnel and kill the Hamas fighters, possibly losing IDF soilders along the way, or 2) you can bomb the fuck out of the civilian houses on top of the tunnel and hope that collapses the tunnel and kills the leader, killing hundreds of civilians. A righteous country, an explicitly religious country who answers to god, would choose to sacrifice it’s soilders over sacrificing innocent lives. Israel instead decided to commit a war crime. And then after being called out by the international community, did the same thing the next day.

Since you like asking questions, maybe you can answer one. Please explain how cutting off food and water for 2.1 million people is a legitimate military tactic and not just the war crime of collective punishment?

Maybe if Israel actually allowed Gaza to hold elections, Hamas wouldn’t be in power 🤔 instead Bibi needed a bad guy on his doorstep to keep in power, and he was too busy engaging in ethnic cleansing in the west bank to actually secure the “border” (i.e, the walls of the open air prison Palestinians are kept in) with Gaza.

Israel is never going to have true security keeping a group of people trapped, without political rights, with strict controls on their access to basic goods. Fuck Hamas, but violence is the predictable result of depriving people of political rights and basic freedoms. Today it’s Hamas, tomorrow it’s some other group, it will keep happening. Building a better cage will only do so much good, desperate people are dangerous. Until that is resolved, Israel will have no real security.