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

641–650 of 664 posts

Re: A/I shuts down

#641

Post by cfloyd »

port11 wrote: post #598
mag7269 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's what you characterize the US government as, I can only imagine what you characterize some of the other governments around the world. Particularly, from the millions of us who migrated to the US legally and willfully and who are very VERY grateful to this country for providing the opportunities people like myself could only dream-of in our former countries.

Many (most?) governments around the world strike no terror on other countries. They don’t go around invading other countries, nor sanctioning them on the basis of belief, nor using their soft/hard power to exert pressure at a global scale. Don’t get me wrong: I’m grateful for many things the USA has done, and for the inventiveness and generosity of its people; but let’s not pretend like their government(s) have been…

A lot of that has to do with the fact that they simply do not need to. Many of these countries rely on allies such as the United States to maintain that aggressive posture for them and offer them the opportunity to remain militarily neutral.

Re: A/I shuts down

#642

Post by cortesoft »

mcv wrote: post #464
cortesoft wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this depends on how you define 'hate speech'. Is talking about how billionaires are the scum of the earth hate speech? I get the idea behind banning hate speech, but it gets really tricky when you try to think how to define and enforce it. Everyone agrees you need to be able to criticize groups that you don't like, so what makes it cross the line to hate speech (besides calls to violence, which would fall und…

I think calls to violence usually only count as threat when they're targeted at a specific person. To me, hate speech is about creating an unsafe, threatening or oppressive situation for a vulnerable demographic group. Like saying a specific ethic group is a threat to society, or general attacks against women in general. Thing that, when repeated enough, will normalise the idea of violence or oppression against that…

I agree with you that it isn't the same, and vulnerability matters.

My worry is that I can easily see an administration like the current US one claiming that MAGA Americans are the most vulnerable in the country, and they need to be protected.

Re: A/I shuts down

#643

Post by Lumich »

InsideOutSanta wrote: post #602
pessimizer wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love how Europeans get pumped up on anti-American rhetoric when they are far more submissive to the US than even a Ukraine or a South Korea is. I'm starting to think the rhetoric (always about what they're about to do, something about Trump, something about Musk) is being pumped to them by US admin think tanks. The US is going to be at peace with Russia, and still pumping anti-Russian rhetoric into Europe to keep t…

I think what you're missing is that for many Western European countries, like Germany, suddenly gaining a direct border with Russia is a genuine concern. It's not just rhetoric; it's the real world. It's easy for Americans, who are essentially uninvadable, to discount this as just people saying stuff, but in Europe, we actually have to live with Russia's direct military threat.

It would be great to have a direct border with Russia, and finally get rid of US troops in Europe. Would solve lots of issues and drastically increase prosperity and well-being. There's never been a Russian threat in the first place. The sustained militarization of post-WW2 Europe, i.e. NATO, the arms race and the Cold War and its world-wide proxy wars, is the result of Britain and the US pursueing their strategy of tension. At every single step it was the US who escalated, divided and militarized Europe. This is a patently obvious fact of history. And it includes the current war using the Ukraine as ram against Russia.

Re: A/I shuts down

#644

Post by dudefeliciano »

Dansvidania wrote: post #638
dudefeliciano wrote: post #628

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> as an Italian, given the dialectic and rhetoric in their statements As if that holds any value, especially considering the rest of your comment, which completely ignores the rhetoric of that "designation". That designation is toilet paper - the wording "violent Antifa cells" in the second sentence should be the wake up signal. > they have root in the no-global movement, a protest group There was/is no protest group…

> As if that holds any value, especially considering the rest of your comment, which completely ignores the rhetoric of that "designation". I am not saying that you have to hold my experience to any value, but I am stating that was my experience. Anyone is free to interpret as they prefer, but I would question your argument as to why. It sounds a lot like "whataboutism". The fact that the designation is bad does not…

First of all I apologize if my previous comment was overly aggressive. Perhaps I got heated because I think this is an an issue that shows were we are going as a society, and it's nowhere good.

> question your argument as to why.

I am also Italian, and I don't feel that "the dialectic and rhetoric" of their statements in any way gives and credibility to the US designation of a "violent antifa cells" equating them to terrorists on the level of Al-Qaeda, ISIS and so on. So there's that, being Italian is not some skill or ability that allows you or me to better understand their statements, especially since they are also translated to English...

> the same experience with such - or any - dialect in English.

That sounds like a cop-out to me, you obviously can express yourself in English quite well, and even if that were not the case phrases like "violent antifa cells", "far-left terrorist networks, built to enable them to organize, recruit, communicate, disseminate propaganda, share target information and tactics, and carry out violent attacks" should clearly show that is nothing more than the lowest form of fearmongering, propaganda and silencing of dissent by an authoritarian government.

Furthermore, especially as Italians, we should support these projects and not give in to notions that "maybe the broken fascist clock is right once in a while".

> wikipedia seems to agree with me on the existence of a "No global movment"

The first sentence: indica organizzazioni non governative, associazioni e singoli individui relativamente ETEROGENEI.

As you put it previously, "a protest group", does not at all convey the notion that these are many people with differing views, and as such there may well be also a violent minority like in any group. No, your comment paints them all with the same brush.

> such as comparing me to Trump :D

I did not compare you as a person to Trump, but the way you are misusing words.

> does not take away from the fact that the rhetoric used in the communication by the collective reminds me of the 'not so not violent' groups that at the very least orbited the violence, and, in my personal opinion, very much winked at and approved of it.

This would be the point were you cite some sources or quotes that give you that impression, rather than relying on your "Italianness" to support your argument.

> in your opinion - I don't criticize both sides equally?

As Italians we should criticize only one side and that is the fascists.

Re: A/I shuts down

#645

Post by 13415 »

mapontosevenths wrote: post #566
13415 wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's defined in the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Long title but the document is like two pages, easy reading for even the intellectually laziest persons.

That definition is less than ideal from several perspectives. It serves neither side. The worst reason to hate it is that it relies on proving intent (dolus specialis), which essentially makes it unenforceable unless the perpetrator is a group of simpletons. It really hit me when I realized that there are only two ways to prove intent: The criminal admits it, or the prosecution proves that there are literally zero ot…

> To be more serious, this wasn't necessary and was rude. What was your goal? To convince me?

My goal wasn't to convince you. My goal was to answer your question even though you were, in my opinion, intellectually lazy when you asked it. Now you pretend you've done your homework and suddenly are an expert on definitions of genocide, of course. That's great! At least you've read the convention now.

Seriously, though, it seems striking to me that you asked in bad faith, and I'm not interested in discussing this matter any further. Ask non-rhetorical questions only if you don't believe to know the answer yet!

Re: A/I shuts down

#646

Post by phyzome »

goosejuice wrote: post #167
phyzome wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people are downvoting you for several reasons: - Taking administration propaganda pieces at face value (such as the batshit insane page you linked to) - Referring to "violent antifa cells". That's the spin Trump has been trying to put on the groups of people who have been resisting fascism. (Do you know what "antifa" stands for?)

One can be anti-fascist and violent. https://www.splcenter.org/resources/reports/better-way/

Of course. But that's not what we have in the present moment, excepting a few instances here and there.

Re: A/I shuts down

#647

Post by mcv »

cortesoft wrote: post #642
mcv wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think calls to violence usually only count as threat when they're targeted at a specific person. To me, hate speech is about creating an unsafe, threatening or oppressive situation for a vulnerable demographic group. Like saying a specific ethic group is a threat to society, or general attacks against women in general. Thing that, when repeated enough, will normalise the idea of violence or oppression against that…

I agree with you that it isn't the same, and vulnerability matters. My worry is that I can easily see an administration like the current US one claiming that MAGA Americans are the most vulnerable in the country, and they need to be protected.

Perhaps, but they don't seem to believe in free speech anyway. They're actively going after media that criticise the government, and are restricting government-funded scientists from using specific words that suggest research that doesn't fit their narrative.

Re: A/I shuts down

#648

Post by mcv »

Lumich wrote: post #643
InsideOutSanta wrote: post #602

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what you're missing is that for many Western European countries, like Germany, suddenly gaining a direct border with Russia is a genuine concern. It's not just rhetoric; it's the real world. It's easy for Americans, who are essentially uninvadable, to discount this as just people saying stuff, but in Europe, we actually have to live with Russia's direct military threat.

It would be great to have a direct border with Russia, and finally get rid of US troops in Europe. Would solve lots of issues and drastically increase prosperity and well-being. There's never been a Russian threat in the first place. The sustained militarization of post-WW2 Europe, i.e. NATO, the arms race and the Cold War and its world-wide proxy wars, is the result of Britain and the US pursueing their strategy of…

> There's never been a Russian threat in the first place.

Have you really had your head in the sand, or are you just desperately trying to sell a transparent lie here? The Putin is not exactly careful about his threats.

Re: A/I shuts down

#649

Post by stale2002 »

ModernMech wrote: post #611
stale2002 wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're missing the distinction between individual action No I'm not. I specially said "in groups".

Yes you are you left out the rest of the sentence: > … and an actual terrorist organization. A group is not “an actual terrorist organization”. You’re trying to say all groups committing a crime against the government are actual terrorists organizations, and they all belong to the same organization, Antifa. That’s not the case. If that’s the case then MAGA is also a terrorist organization — at least they have a clear…

> You’re trying to say all groups committing a crime against the government are actual terrorists organizations

No, I only said that the ones that are committing terrorist attacks, or similarly serious vigilante violence or sabotaging critical infrastructure in groups are.

Mere "crimes" aren't the same as targeting a powerplant for example.

Re: A/I shuts down

#650

Post by stale2002 »

bakies wrote: post #559
stale2002 wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the basic alliance is that anyone who wants to harm the USA nominally is ok with working together regardless of contradicting underlying ideology. That why you'll see russia, iranian, marxist, and anarchist supporters/ideologies all using the same talking points.

You didn't describe any relationships. I don't think leftists are intending harm on the USA

Far leftists are quite open about how they think the USA is the evil empire and that Russian, China, Iran, ect are the "multipolar" world that they support.

You must be thinking of progressives who merely want free healthcare. Sure, an average bernie fan who wants some more government programs doesn't want the USA to fail. Instead, I am talking about the campists, the far lefties, or the "tankies" that they are sometimes called.

Post reply on HN