Democrats will continue to give sternly worded remarks all the way up to their appointment with the gallows, so brave!

When They Go Low, We Go Die

Chapter 3

Marjorie smiled with great satisfaction as she looked at the crowd and began to check the rifle in her arms to make sure there was a round in the chamber.

2 men with giant beer guts - who each wore different flavors of Punisher-style skull masks and were covered head to toe in pointlessly elaborate tactical surplus gear as if they were cosplaying their favorite Call of Duty characters - began dragging another elderly man up to the makeshift platform.

The white-haired old man was dressed in a finely tailored dark blue suit with a little American flag lapel pin next to his tie. It looked so similar to the one that so many others in his cohort had adorned for probably the last 20 or so years, but he had been blindfolded by the men before being brought before the stage so he couldn’t see how many others still wore it or who had switched to the golden lion that… “the others…” now wore exclusively.

The octogenarian ghost of a man feebly began to speak (not shout) loudly in protest as if trying to reason with whomever might be in charge, but the 2 pig-like men grinned and said nothing. They began tying his hands behind him against a wooden pole covered with small holes, indentations and spatters of red. As the grinning pigs both stepped away from the geriatric man secured to the pole, the mob just below him roared with wild bloodlust over his inaudible words drowning them out over and over again with : “USA! USA! USA! USA!”

Marjorie laughed and took one hand away from the rifle to quiet the crowd so they could hear the old man’s words :

“Point of order, Mr. Chairman! Point of order! I’m reclaiming my time! I’d like the gentle-lady to put down the firearm she just picked up, Mr. Ch-”

…he was cut off with a loud and sudden BANG as he slumped into a dark puddle of red slowly expanding across the stage floor.

The crowd roared and resumed its repeated chant…

…and another blindfolded well-dressed elderly figure was walked up to the pole.

Quoting the entire comment you’re replying to is kinda redundant

In what country are you not allowed to talk about something you watched

I got the math the wrong way around but read the bottom of the bot’s post. The bot’s job is to cut the fluff out of articles, and it copy/pastes the remaining text for us to read here.

So my comment should have said 40%, but the point was if we’re comparing what the bot did with your coworkers talking about a game, it’d be more akin to them reciting the commentator verbatim.

Impressive that your coworkers discuss the events exclusively by recalling 60% of the announcer’s words and then quoting them verbatim.

This the the problem for the LLM, it can be used for many things, and if it has no filter or limit

I agree with pretty much everything before this but that particular comment was just talking about summaries, which imo is a lot more cut and dry. (SparkNotes, for example)

An LLM by itself is unlimited and unfiltered, but it’s not impossible to limit one and sell it. For all the shit OpenAI deserves to get, I have to give them one thing, their copyright restriction system seems to be on par with YouTube. I paid for a month of it when GPT4 came out and tried my hardest to bypass it, but it won’t even give me copyrighted texts when the words are all replaced with synonyms or jumbled around.

I think if someone’s offering their LLM as a service and has a system like that in place, they aren’t stealing any more than YouTube is stealing. Otherwise I agree that there’s a strong argument for copyright infringement.

Look, guys! The TLDR bot is stealing!

!Arthur Dent has his home demolished while humans simultaneously have Earth demolished by an alien race called Vogons, but him and Ford Prefect escape by hitchhiking onto the Vogon ship. They’re discovered and thrown into space, but miraculously saved by Ford’s relative (can’t remember how they’re related) and his ship The Heart of Gold, which is powerful but unpredictable. They wind up on a mythical planet due to that unpredictability, and learn that Earth was a designer planet created to calculate the ultimate answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything. (The famous “42” thing). The whole crew escapes the planet and decides to go to The Restaurant at the End of The Universe to eat and watch the universe end.!<

Have I just stolen The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy and given it to you?

PCussy

These words exist for a reason they mean different things.

Correct, and you’re still misusing them according to the people who actually identify with these labels. Atheism is the answer to what you believe, and agnosticism is the answer to what you know.

I don’t believe God exists and I don’t know if God exists, so I’m an agnostic atheist. For you to assume atheists are gnostic by default is like me assuming Christians are Mormons by default. It’d be even more ridiculous for me to go on and argue with Christians that “Christian” means “Mormon.”

deleted by creator

I haven’t seen much of it at all in my 1+ year here, so y’all are doing a great job :3

Sure. And nobody claimed “God doesn’t exist.” Two people now have told you that you’re mistaken, but you insist.

From our perspective it seems like you’re imposing a baseless claim onto us so you can feel better about your own baseless claims. Only theists say atheism is a claim.

In addition to what the others said already: she was recently accosted by right wingers for making a “happy pride” post where she said she was glad to have all the LGBTQ parents and friends in her audience, and was glad they were who they were.

That’s probably the reason it’s an Onion article.

Wouldn’t that be long term memory loss

Ask literally any atheist here if they claim “god does not exist”

Same. Guess I won’t bother looking into it if it’s impossible 🤷‍♀️

Useless “nobody”.

It doesn’t sound familiar because nobody here is saying God is impossible. We’re saying they don’t have good reason for believing he exists.

I don’t go around telling ten-dimensional physicists to stop believing in, and speculating about, a theoretical field that’s devoid of evidence.

You wouldn’t have to tell them to stop “believing” in string theory because none of them do. The math happens to work out so a lot of them are interested, but none of them “believe” in it because it hasn’t been tested.

Why are the atheists in this thread qualified to tell them they are wrong to hold it?

We’re not saying they’re wrong. We’re saying their reasons for believing aren’t good reasons. And in a thread about why people believe, criticism is not only warranted, but expected.

Gnostic atheists were imposing their own beliefs on the religious through unsolicited critical condemnation.

Can you point me to even one atheist here making a gnostic claim? The link you already gave is just Communist saying you don’t have evidence, and it seems like you’re translating every other instance of that to “GOD ISN’T REAL”.

You must live in a very different society than those in Europe or America if your experience with theists has just been “people hypothesizing.” You also must not have read the Bible, Torah, or Quran. Their “beliefs” are presented as facts in all three of those religions, both by their holy texts and their people, and I don’t know of any religion that doesn’t also do that.

If not, it’s absolutely arrogant to tell them they’re wrong to believe in the existence of something that science is also only hypothesizing.

And again, nobody is saying they’re wrong. We’re saying they don’t have good reason to believe what they believe. Just look at the link you sent earlier.

And if an atheist genuinely believes their own untested hypothesis about what happened before the big bang is true, whether they’re a scientist or a layman, the same criticisms apply to them, too.

The big bang isn’t creation ex nihilo, and it’s not a theistic claim. But more importantly, nobody with any scientific credibility claims we know the theory is true with absolute certainty. They don’t even claim it adequately explains 100% of the universe as we observe it. A lot of laymen probably think the big bang is creation ex nihilo and use it to explain the “something from nothing” issue, but that’s not what the theory says.

There are currently only theories as to how the Big Bang began

Hypotheses. Which nobody “believes” in like theists do with God.

Since there is no evidence, there is no reason why religion can’t hypothesize the same as science.

You’re right. They can hypothesize all they want. But they don’t present their claims as hypotheses, they present them as the truth. Scientists don’t claim their hypotheses are the truth, and they especially don’t believe it to be true before doing any testing.

the thread you called “painful to read” is a debate with a commenter who is stating exactly that.

The link you gave me doesn’t show him claiming God doesn’t exist, and neither are any of the comments before it.