Firstly, the definition of paraphrasing is repeating someone's meaning in different words; if you lift their words verbatim, you are quoting, not paraphrasing.
Secondly, both quoting and paraphrasing someone else's work to portray it as your own is plagiarism (since in both cases you are repeating their work and not conducting and presenting your own), so your attempt at a defence is not only wrong, it makes no sense. You're just (inaccurately) attempting to portray plagiarism through quotes as plagiarism through paraphrases as though that makes it something other than plagiarism.
@kerrygutknecht@mtracey@GoodLawProject Copying work verbatim is plagiarism; citations are for giving credit regarding specific facts and data, not lifted texts.
You also failed to present evidence that he cited the plagiarised quote (which would be irrelevant anyway), instead randomly screenshotting a bibliography.
I think a lot of it comes down to people who live in echo chambers and never experience the negative effects of the policies themselves.
The echo chamber rewards compliance, while the lack of repercussions means there is no punishment for it even when it backfires spectacularly.
It's not dissimilar to the psychology of someone gambling with someone else's money, while surrounded by similarly fortunate friends who are peer pressuring them to continue playing.
@jk_rowling A lot of people seem to think that if an organisation has a benevolent sounding name and advertises itself as kind, is must be good and its opponents must be evil. Such people are very easy for institutions to manipulate.
If it supports speech laws, that's a problem, but to steelman its position here: it's not in charge of the law and Anthropic could get in a lot of trouble if their AI is found to have helped people evade prosecution, even if the prosecution was absurd.
So, it's probably trained to always say no when asked questions that could pertain to trying to get away from existing legal cases.
Try asking the same questions without telling it that you're facing prosecution. Hopefully, it will be more helpful. If not, your criticism is entirely fair and it's disappointing, since Claude's one of the best AIs for science and coding.
@SPBASS1@Red1948787@TheCriticalDri2 No one has mentioned anyone having no opinion, they are talking about being away and taking a break from posting; why are you inventing a straw man?
That's just a straw man.
The idea that intolerance of disagreement and allowing that intolerance to affect friendships would necessitate pre-existing absolute separation is not valid.
In any given case, the problem could be that they are less pleasant and less intimate with friends who disagree with them, or that their friends feel the need to avoid discussing politics or even hide their beliefs entirely.
I have personally had LW relatives and friends become more distant or even stop being friends after discovering that I support RW parties. I tend to avoid mentioning that I support RW parties with LW people and try to redirect conversations away form politics, since I know that in many cases it will lead to awkwardness, arguments, and never seeing them again.
The follow on question might then be "why would you want to be friends with people like that?" It's a good question; but ultimately, humans are complicated and in many cases you appreciate the other, non-political elements of their personalities.
Your groupings are arbitrary; why separate year and millennium to have 2602 rather than 2026?
You have a 0 before 2 for the millennium, indicating that your system is designed for millennia with up to two digits. Do you predict an apocalypse before we reach three?
Why not limit the day element to be 1-7 and have a separate number for the week of the month?
You should have commas or full stops between the elements.
You left out "seconds". Don't they have those where you're from?
I wonder if the internet exacerbates this. You can see the apocalypse happening in a livestream and comment on it without your brain truly registering that it's real.
The disconnect between reality and fiction doesn't just result in people believing fictions they saw online to be true; it also results in them seeing reality as increasingly abstract until they treat it as though it were fiction.
@logisti00@jonatanpallesen No, your claim was nonsense. Biological features such as height are not the same as races.
You also completely evaded responding to everything else I said. Why is that?
Even your analogy is wrong; you seem to think tall people are a race.
You are also engaging with a straw man; no one said anything about individual people having dating preferences, they were talking about institutions discriminating against races.
Your argument consists of evading responding to his refutations of your position by throwing out absurd false equivalences.
You've also claimed white people are the wealthiest in the US, which is wrong; that's Asians.
You also claimed he engaged in personal attacks. He didn't.
You've also admitted that DEI policies are discriminatory based upon race, only to argue that that isn't racist. What an Orwellian argument; you're just redefining words to mean something else so that you can get yourself confused into thinking things that make no sense. "War is peace" has been replaced with 'discriminating based upon race isn't racist'.
Many modern helmets are derived in design from the German helmets of WW1/WW2, which were inspired by sallets. So, if you settle for "sallet inspired" rather than full sallet, you can already get one.
But a full sallet would be cool, though you wouldn't be able to fight properly (notice that modern helmets are far shorter than medieval helmets, ending just below the ears rather than going down to the mid/lower neck. This is because modern soldiers need to be able to lie down and tilt their heads up to aim; if your helmet extends down to your neck, this would push the helmet against your back, tilting the whole thing forward, and cause it to block your eyes).
@nguyenhdi He was named after Mocha Island, where he was often seen and conducted a number of attacks.
The actual whale was much larger than the sculpture; he was about 70 feet long, but the sculpture is only 52 feet long.
He was albino and was the inspiration for Moby Dick.
@drhingram@EssexPR Both Reform and Restore are terrible; they both act as though the other is their worst enemy, as though mutual enemies don't even exist, and refuse to contemplate the notion of tactical voting or compromise.
I suspect they truly are personal vehicles for two men to bicker.