Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A/I shuts down

keepitfree.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 657 posts

Re: A/I shuts down

#361

Post by Waterluvian »

runarberg wrote: post #355
jpoesen wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh sweet summer child, you would be absolutely correct were it not for your unfortunate confounding of NATO with the USA.

I am biased here, as somebody who grew up next to an American military base in Iceland and had a pro-communist upbringing and learned to hate NATO (as well as the American imperialist agenda as a whole) from an early age. I don‘t see a difference. I was told this when I was a child, and as I’ve grown up and seen more of the world (including by immigrating to the USA) I am more convinced then ever. In my eyes, there i…

There clearly is. Because NATO isn’t getting involved in America’s idiotic war of aggression and Trump is very upset about this. They’ve spent years being very upset about every other NATO nation’s spending, too.

So even if you don’t believe it, the U.S. clearly cares about NATO member behaviour and therefore recognizes a distinction.

Re: A/I shuts down

#362

Post by stale2002 »

ipython wrote: post #105
mc32 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Let me fix that for you. Lots of maga are idealists (even if their ideas are not based in the real world), a number of them are LARPers and a small number are hard core intent on eliminating “the enemy”. To think that no maga member is violent and entertains violent options, is denying reality. Also it’s disingenuous to think they are all out of their minds looking to overthrow the government. Many just have ideals t…

Its not controversial to say that right wing extremists exist, some of which even commit violence, so your analogy isn't the brilliant whataboutism gotcha that you intended it to be.

So yes, just like some very far right people exist, that can justifiably be called terrorists, so to do some very far left individuals.

Re: A/I shuts down

#363

Post by JuniperMesos »

jtrn wrote: post #18

I also oppose fascism, militarism, racism, sexism, homophobia, and transphobia, like what A/I do... And none of that is illegal... At least not in any civilised society. So what did they do to trigger so many? I remember the Norwegian stuff (since I’m Norwegian), and I remember thinking it sounded like bullshit to copy their entire server drive when they wanted access to the blog of two people. From what I could gath…

[flagged]

Re: A/I shuts down

#364

Post by stale2002 »

sdenton4 wrote: post #104
mc32 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

... But also, there's no organization called antifa, and no antifa members. It's an accusation levied against people the right wing wants to call terrorists.

> But also, there's no organization called antifa, and no antifa members

Left wing extremist groups absolutely exist. The fact that they don't go around wearing matching uniforms with the letters ANTIFA on them doesn't change that.

Your demand for an exact membership list is simply not how extremist organizations work. Terroristic groups have always been fairly amorphous.

Re: A/I shuts down

#365

Post by driverdan »

xyst wrote: post #273

The "terrorist" definition is just anybody that doesn’t agree with this administration at this point. They will fabricate anything to justify their thinly veiled intentions.

This isn't new, it changed after 9/11. The US government expanded the definition of terrorism to pretty much mean anything they want.

Re: A/I shuts down

#366

Post by [deleted] »

stymaar wrote: post #86
unfocso wrote: post #12

Really sad, and also a testament of the fact that as much as we think we try to be indipendent, eventually once somebody starts putting enough pressure on the people around you (and you turn from "a neutral customer" to "a liability") the path to isolation is very short.

This. When the US government decides to label you “terrorist organization”, it means that you are now targeted by the most potent state actor on earth, which will go as far as blowing up weddings in your neighborhood to stop you. So unless you're willing to become a literal terrorist organization and die with a bunch of your friends in an uphill battle (not technically unwinnable, but at least lopsided and the casual…

[deleted]

Re: A/I shuts down

#367

Post by [deleted] »

coldpie wrote: post #85
arcticfox wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could someone point me to some background on this whole incident or write a quick one? I don't know who they are or what's going on but it seems important.

The US Republican party has been inventing an increasingly elaborate alternate reality fiction in order to convince their voters to keep voting for policy positions that obviously work against those voters' own interests. One component of this alternate reality is a fictional terrorist organization called "antifa." They claim that anyone who does not align with their policies is a member of this organization. This al…

[deleted]

Re: A/I shuts down

#368

Post by [deleted] »

kryogen1c wrote: post #351
dvt wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So unless you're willing to become a literal terrorist organization and die with a bunch of your friends in an uphill battle (not technically unwinnable, but at least lopsided and the casualties will be tremendous), the only option is to cave. Honestly, the internet has made folks so lazy. It's very ironic that the most "revolutionary" act taken recently (January 6) was actually done by the far-right. Yeah: if you…

> you need to actually get out of the basement, grab a gun, and storm the Capitol. This is not what happened on J6, and is specifically why it was not an insurrection.

[deleted]

Re: A/I shuts down

#370

Post by [deleted] »

parineum wrote: post #227
Normal_gaussian wrote: post #42

I wasn't aware of this group; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autistici/Inventati is their wiki article, but it is a little light on details. Some of the claims are interesting - "Decision making in the group takes places collectively instead of through majority voting." - isn't explained by the sourced article.

That seems like two words for the same thing to me but making the distinction seems like a signalling mechanism to me.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN