That time Janeway and Paris hit Warp 10 in Star Trek.

Such a cool concept ruined by such a stupid episode.

Also Trip doesn’t die.

deleted by creator

Karl Marx. And never. Marx is immortal.

An extra hard drive for offline backup of my home server. Just knowing I have a cold, unplugged copy of my data in my drawer has made me less paranoid about accidentally “rm -rf”-ing my computer and taking all the mount points with it or my dog getting her paw caught on a wire (she likes to run around haphazardly and is pretty clumsy) and dragging the entire hard drive enclosure down with it.

Ideally I wouldn’t keep that drive in my house but I don’t have anywhere else to put it. Maybe someday I’ll get a safe deposit box or something but then my lazy ass probably wouldn’t bother to retrieve and sync my data nearly as often.

Man, I bought proper earbuds after using bottom shelf specials all the time and I realized there were sounds in my favorite songs I’d never heard before.

Now I’m just hoping they last more than a year. The last time I bought expensive brand name earbuds one stopped connecting in literally a few months while the cheap knockoffs seem to last forever.

Just make sure you choose rich parents when getting conceived smh

OK, face of Karl Marx then. The German guy who never even set foot in the USSR.

Oh wait you think that’s bad too.

What about Mao-no.

What about Che Guev-no.

Ho Chi-no.

Venez-no.

What about the Paris commune? No? Still bad in your mind?

Marxist Austria? Nah I’m sure the army that put an end to that is preferable according to you. They called themselves socialist with none of the Soviet imagery after all!

Even if we completely rebranded socialism you’d make it your mission to add the Soviet imagery back in and remind everyone of it. Like y’all do for decidedly capitalist bandaids like student loan forgiveness or food stamps that don’t even have anything to do with socialism.

You’re a hypocrite for asking me not to or pointing it out.

No? I’m definitely what people like you call an “authoritarian seeseepee tankie” who supposedly loves suppressing speech for sport. My comment was perfectly inline (get it? cause I toe the party line?) with the totalitarian dictatorship aspirations I definitely totally have.

An AGI wouldn’t need to read every book because it can build on the knowledge it already has to draw new conclusions it wasn’t “taught.”

Also, an AGI would be able to keep a consistent narrative regardless of the amount of data or context it has, because it would be able to create an internal model of what is happening and selectively remember the most important things more so than things that are inconsequential (not to mention assess what’s important and what can be forgotten to shed processing overhead), all things a human does instinctively when given more information than your brain can immediately handle. Meanwhile, an LLM is totally dependent on how much context it actually has bufferered, and giving it too much information will literally push all the old information out of its context, never to be recalled again. It has no ability to determine what’s worth keeping and that’s not, only what’s more or less recent. I’ve personally noticed this especially with smaller locally run LLMs with very limited context windows. If I begin troubleshooting some Linux issue using it, I have to be careful with how much of a log I paste into the prompt, because if I paste too much, it will literally forget why I pasted the log in the first place. This is most obvious with Deepseek and other reasoning models because it will actually start trying to figure out why it was given that input when “thinking,” but it’s a problem with any context based model because that’s its only active memory. I think the reason this happens so obviously when you paste too much in a single prompt and less so when having a conversation with smaller prompts is because it also has its previous outputs in its context, so while it might have forgotten the very first prompt and response, it repeats the information enough times in subsequent prompts to keep it in its more recent context (ever notice how verbose AI tends to be? That could potentially be a mitigation strategy). Meanwhile, when you give it a very large prompt as big or bigger than its context window, it completely overwrites the previous responses, leaving no hints to what was there before.

OK, edited.

Specific info, and I’m guessing really specific:

One of the closest allies of the U.S., the U.K. has reportedly suspended sharing some intelligence with the Pentagon due to concern over the boat strikes in the Caribbean, according to CNN.

[…]

In response to a request for comment from TIME, a U.K. government spokesperson said on Wednesday: “It is our longstanding policy to not comment on intelligence matters.”

They went on to say that the “U.S. is our closest ally on security and intelligence. We continue to work together to uphold global peace and security, defend freedom of navigation, and respond to emerging threats.”

Which makes me think they haven’t actually stopped sharing all that much

The irony being that the boomers who say the “builds character” shit had a vastly easier life compared to their parents and grandparents, who fought literal world wars. They think all societal change before them was good (including stuff like colonialism which they see as “civilizing” the savage natives) but any progress after them is the devil because it means they might have to change their behaviour or worldviews, hell, or even the idea that people they think are less than them getting less disadvantaged and oppressed than before which I guess make them jealous or something?

anarchist erasure

You know you can just repost this with the anarchist symbol pasted over the hammer and sickle in response right? Like you think the OP presumably did to your symbol. If you care, there’s nothing stopping you from erasing us tankies right back, we can handle it. You could even snarkily title it “Perspectives about life (fixed)” or something. Go crazy, this is literally the meme community.

Also, ironic that an anarchist is protesting someone covering up their symbol to express a different thought. No kings or masters or hierarchy but an abstract symbol on a shitpost is sacred and can’t be touched?

“DUHH, IT’S BECAUSE SPEECH IN CHINA IS CENSORED AND YOU’LL LITERALLY GET SENT TO A XINJIANG CONCENTRATION CAMP IF YOU TRIED BEING A VLOGGER”

By squeezing an entire can of spinach until its contents shoot up in the air, catching it with your mouth, and then flexing your uncanny overly defined biceps.

The winner of the Dynamite “Peace” Prize likes war, what a surprise.

As a general rule of thumb, any in-store prepared food in a large grocery store (the ones that come in the store’s own packaging) was probably raw food that had been sitting for ages and they couldn’t sell in time. They’ll literally cut mold out of fruits and slice up the rest for those plastic platters. Every time they re-print a label, it resets the expiry date and you have no idea how many times they’ve done that and just shuffled food around by turning it into different forms.

CBC Marketplace video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxCT_D6HBd8

Define “doing things which enable you to survive.” In my definition, that doesn’t involve being king or exploiting others to hoard more wealth than you could ever hope to spend. You need some minimum amount of resources to survive but hoarding many times more than you need doesn’t help you survive and only harms others.

“If a monkey hoards more bananas than it can eat, causing its peers to starve while most of the bananas rot in its pile, scientists will study its brain to find out what the hell is wrong with it. But when a human does it, they get celebrated under capitalism.”

Also, it was once human nature to flee from fire, but once we learned to control it, it became an integral part of our lives. Human “nature” changes over time because your brain is pretty much a blank slate when you’re born and doesn’t fully finish structuring itself until your 20s. Your entire childhood is spent developing your “nature” that you’ll have for your adult life (and even then you can change it at will even in adulthood if you change your living conditions), which is why we’re more influenced by the conditions we grow up in than any sort of innate biology. What “nature” was best for hunter gatherer or even medieval times are totally obsolete in our modern day, so they stop being our default “nature” due to children no longer growing up in those conditions.

The idea that your nature is influenced by your conditions isn’t even unique to humans. Most animals are the same, a house cat or dog will learn from a very young age how to beg for food from their owners while a feral cat/dog won’t because that’s not beneficial for their survival when they’re not a pet. Hell, house cats keep making kitten sounds because their owners keep treating them like kittens, while feral cats stop meowing once they leave their parents. Animals born and raised in captivity in general often show completely different behaviors and personality compared to wild animals of the same species, because their brains are literally structured differently due to growing up in different conditions.

Yes. Because it benefited them over others. Humans are capable of choosing to do things that benefit them and it has nothing to do with their “nature”. Human nature is to not die and in the ages when humans could barely produce enough food for their own survival, it was beneficial to be in a position of power because it let you control the resources, ensuring you had enough for yourself and maybe some of your subjects as an afterthought. Marxism does not reject the notion that power benefits the people who have then, in fact that’s a core fact that Marxism is based on, and it calls out the fact that feudal/monarchist/capitalist power benefits the ruling class by subjugating and exploiting the working class, and proposes that fully collective control of resources will benefit everyone much more equally than the current system. I don’t think you have to agree with Marxism’s proposed solution to this to recognize the problem it points out. It asserts that because we have lived in such systems our whole lives, we think it’s human nature when in reality a person born and living in some other system (Marxist or otherwise) will think their system is human nature, because in reality no system is and they’re all abstract inventions with nothing to do with our neurobiology or evolution.

For a non political example, I write code all day because it benefits me and I think it’s the most normal and intuitive thing ever, even though I doubt programming was something humans evolved to do, we figured it out ourselves and it had nothing to do with our nature. You literally have to learn and practice abstract computational thinking while learning to program because it’s very unintuitive at times compared to how humans think by default, yet people learn it just fine and once you do, it becomes your nature.

The cool thing about humans is we’re not bound to natural instincts and can choose to live however we want. I think we should leverage this ability instead of using it as a justification for maintaining the same broken systems that have let us down over and over again.

Because humans experiment with societal rules as societies were developing and get into self reinforcing loops that go on long after everyone’s forgotten why it happened in the first place.

Human nature is to form societies. What happens in those societies and how they are structured are the result of chaotic interactions and competing thought that, again, are the result of material conditions those humans find themselves in.

There are plenty of societies that don’t strictly follow the Roman/European system of power. Japan for example had their emperor reduced to a symbolic position long before European contact, but even though the emperor had most of his real power taken away, everyone still called him emperor and worshipped him because he was so important to their culture, power or not. Meanwhile, in what would be modern day India, multiple different religions arose based on selfless sacrifice for others and rejection of indulgence and pleasure in favor of self reflection and simple living, with many people throughout history in the region (princes, heirs of family fortunes, etc) fully rejecting their very privileged lifestyles to embrace aestheticism. Same with ancient Greek stoic and cynic philosophers many of which came from rich and powerful families yet deliberately choose to reject all of it. That all seems pretty against “human nature” no? Then you had the Indigenous tribes of the world who practiced small egalitarian societal groups and did perfectly fine until Europeans intervened.