Live data from Hacker News

Grokipedia and the coup against reality

thedissident.news

191–200 of 214 posts

Re: Grokipedia and the coup against reality

#191

The gap widens. If you're discussing something online, and someone drops a Grok link as evidence or reference material, how are you supposed to continue at that point? You can't convince someone who lives in an alternate reality of anything by argument. I think I would just stop relying. Most people would. It's not a new problem, but that wall keeps growing.

It depends on the forum, but I think some level of "flamewar" type stuff should be tolerated for scenarios like this. I'd happily be okay with someone replying to me and saying "you're really fucking offbase and delusional on this because X, Y, and Z" as it provides a quick reality check (or a point to respond to)

Maybe if X, Y and Z were things you could verify. But what if you also didn't believe X, Y and Z, and believed all sites saying X, Y and Z were propaganda, and also didn't believe W which would imply X, nor U and V which would imply W, and so on? That's the situation we find ourselves in.

If you've never seen them, I suggest looking up some flat earth debates on YouTube. This used to be a joke, but now there are enough people who actually believe the earth is flat to have formed a community that gets in video flamewars with round-earthers.

Re: Grokipedia and the coup against reality

#192
post #176
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the current standards of US discourse, Dick Cheney and both Presidents Bush, and Reagan as per recent advert drama, are "left wing". By British standards, the US Democrats are dangerously radical libertarians owing to the fact the Democrats support even the slightest right to personal access to firearms. There's only a rounding error of support in the British policians for "republican" policies, i.e. ceasing to be…

Yes. Islamic violence is a significant issue in the UK.

Yaxley-Lennon has various convictions. Some of these including for libel against specific muslim children; some for contempt of court interfering with the fairness of trials thus risking the release of people who were ultimately convicted; and some where his libel lead to his supporters committing violence against muslims.

(Keeping the [num]s in the quotations, those are the only citations that really matter).

  On 10 May 2017, Robinson was charged with contempt of court, and convicted.[149][150][151] He had filmed inside Canterbury Crown Court and posted prejudicial statements calling the defendants "Muslim child rapists" while the jury was deliberating.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Robinson#Contempt_of_cou...

Now, here's the thing: the bit in quotation marks was 100% true. But by saying so before they were actually convicted threatened to undermine the trial, and without a fair trial they could not be convicted. His actions made justice harder.

If you really care about such crimes, the last thing you should do is what Yaxley-Lennon actually did. The only outcome for which Yaxley-Lennon behaviour is coherent is where Yaxley-Lennon was engineering a riot either by causing their release or getting himself arrested. He got a riot for being arrested:

  At a demonstration in London on 9 June, over 10,000 protesters blocked the roads around Trafalgar Square and some attacked police, injuring five officers.[198] Some demonstrators prevented a Muslim woman from driving a bus,[199] performed Nazi salutes, threw scaffolding, glass bottles, and street furniture at police, and damaged vehicles and buildings.[200]
- ibid.

Regarding his libel that harmed a child:

  The clip shows the victim, with his arm in a cast, being dragged to the floor by his neck as his attacker says "I'll drown you" and "what are you saying now" on a school playing field, while forcing water from a bottle into the victim's mouth. The video was filmed in a lunch break. The clip shows the victim walking away, without reacting, as the attacker and others can be heard continuing to verbally abuse him.[1]
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almondbury_Community_School_bu...

And thats apart from the whole "kicked the officer in the head as he lay on the ground" and "entered the United States illegally [on a false passport]" convictions that Yaxley-Lennon has.

Re: Grokipedia and the coup against reality

#193

This reminds me of a joke website I pondered making a few years ago 'provemeright.com'. If you are in a bar and you make an outrageous claim and don't want to back down, provemeright.com has your back! Give us 10 min and we will edit wikipedia and create a website with your 'fact' on it!... It was a funny joke when it wasn't real.

Also works for getting backstage passes to concerts! [0]

[0] https://liveforlivemusic.com/news/fan-edits-wikipedia-page-t...

Re: Grokipedia and the coup against reality

#194
post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The next administration should imprison Musk. I don’t think I need to elaborate.

Sorry, for which crimes? I know the justice system is flawed, but ideally shouldn’t there be specific laws that are broken, to justify imprisonment?

I’m sure there could be some argument to be made for obstruction of justice considering he oversaw the firing/dissolution of agencies and people investigating his dealings. Plus wherever those investigations lead.

The SSA data heist also sticks out.

Re: Grokipedia and the coup against reality

#195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Wikipedia article doesn't mention Ward-Perkins, a prominent scholar in the camp arguing that the dark ages represented real material decline. The Grokipedia article cites him extensively. Wikipedia is not supposed to be an academic journal where all sorts of competing views are put forth and debated. I do not go to wikipedia to learn the 15 different alternative theories about [subject], I want to learn what th…

> As it happens, The Dark Ages is also one of my Special Interests and the term is reductive to the point of useless. It's a very loaded word that promotes a biased view of history that is, for the most part, meaningfully incorrect. Industrial output, long-distance trade, literacy, artistic quality (yes, I know it's subjective. I don't care: if it hadn't collapsed the Grotesque style wouldn't have been a revolution),…

> The perspective you've adopted is exactly the one that needs to respond to intellectual competition, because this nonsense about "oh, there was just a change in civilization style and we don't know which is better so don't judge" is infuriating and gaslights the public.

I absolutely can and will make moral value judgements about civilizational statuses. Lower literacy rates is bad! Public healthcare is good!

The problem is that the world is far more complicated than the term "dark ages" accurately reflects. There sure was a reduction in some types of trade and some literacy rates in some specific areas at some specific times.

Constantinople was having a fine old time in 450c.e. for example and their literacy rates hadn't changed meaningfully.

> By the fifth century, what we'd call serfdom was common

Yes? It was also common in the 4th century, 3rd century, 2nd century, 1st century... you get the idea.

I looked up the "bound to parent professions" and the first reference I can find is to emperor Diocletian around 280c.e., I admit I'm not sure if that counts as part of your dark ages.

> Oh, and almost the entire corpus of classical literature was lost.

The "corpus of literature" was constantly being lost before the invention of the printing press.

Look, talking about history (and in general) requires some degree of generalization and vagueness. We literally don't have time to cover every single detail, so we use commonly understood if slightly inaccurate terms like "roman empire" to refer to complicated subjects. "Dark Ages" is similar.

It doesn't help that the term "Dark Ages" was invented specifically to make Rome/Greece and the Renaissance ages look better. It's hardly an unbiased term.

But the overall point is that if you actually look at history, 900 c.e. is really truly not that much different from 500 c.e. or 1200 c.e.

Re: Grokipedia and the coup against reality

#196
post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't reason with fascists so the 'but they say things I agree with sometimes' is irrelevant. Either you keep pushing them out of public spaces and undermine their ability to organise regardless of whether they manage to say something innocuous or dress nicely for once, or you're at best lacking in knowledge about how the movement functions but more likely a sympathiser. Sanger has been voicing politically motiva…

[flagged]

No, there are many other political movements I also disagree with, for example the broader reactionary tendency, including conservatives and neo-liberal groups.

Commonly I also disagree with people on ethical or religious grounds. For example I vehemently disagree with most protestants on the issue of capitalism which they consider compatible with the teachings of the biblical Jesus, and I while I agree with many catholics on this same issue I disagree with church mediated caritas as the social solution.

Frankly, I think you're the one that mostly comes across as scared here.

Re: Grokipedia and the coup against reality

#197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are the counter-balance to far left people like George Soros and his numerous foundations.

"far left" "George Soros" Are you a bot? Or are you just trying to start internet arguments to inflate your own ego?

[flagged]

Re: Grokipedia and the coup against reality

#198

Interesting that a neutral submission for the launch of and direct link to Grokipedia was just flagged [1] while this highly sensationalized news article goes up after https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45726459

Hey CupricTea,

I'm working on building a social media site that wants to improve on moderation and I've found the case of the Grokipedia curious. So I'd love to get in touch with your but didn't find any details in your bio. Please reach out to me and let's do a user interview (can be via email too). My contacts are in my bio

Re: Grokipedia and the coup against reality

#199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikipedia is flawed, weaponized, and *intentionally* deceptive, with a myriad of articles locked down and editorialized by authors to fit their specific worldview, refusing to add information or even links to approved sources if it contradicts their narrative.

What are some examples?

> What are some examples?

"Weaponizing Wikipedia Against Israel" https://aish.com/weaponizing-wikipedia-against-israel/

Re: Grokipedia and the coup against reality

#200
post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are some examples?

> What are some examples? "Weaponizing Wikipedia Against Israel" https://aish.com/weaponizing-wikipedia-against-israel/

Using that site as evidence is about as credible as linking to a Ben Shapiro vlog
Post reply on HN