@Biblicalman A Christian's entire income belongs to God, but we have freedom in how to use it for God. If someone's family needs some of that 10% so he isn't worse than an unbeliever, it's valid. If there is a cause more effective than the local church by how things fall, maybe that's valid.
The creator of Super Mario wants everyone to be able to make games. Meanwhile, r/opensource is banning AI projects and erecting new barriers to entry.
Shigeru Miyamoto is celebrating the elimination of technical barriers to creativity, calling it a very good era.
Meanwhile, a community supposedly dedicated to openness is imposing restrictions on AI-assisted work, minimum contributor requirements, and years of development before projects are welcome.
One side is celebrating the democratization of creation. The other is desperately trying to preserve the gatekeepers.
Pick your side. I know which side I want to be on.
You absolute midwit. Congrats on repeating the Wikipedia "Nazis were far-right, end of story" summary you absorbed between TikToks.
Yes, the Nazis crushed independent unions, jailed and murdered communists and social democrats, and Hitler liquidated the Strasserite "left" wing of his own party in the Night of the Long Knives. That part is not in dispute. They were not Marxist class-struggle socialists. They hated Bolshevism as a Jewish plot and treated international socialism as the main enemy. Fine.
What your middle-school history class skipped is that they still ran a National *Socialist* state: private property existed only as long as it served the Führer’s racial and war goals, wages and prices were controlled, industry was cartelized under state direction, profit was subordinated to the party, and the economy was planned for autarky and rearmament. That is not free-market capitalism, liberal conservatism, or classical right-wing economics. It is the same family of state-directed, anti-liberal, collectivist economics practiced by every other fascist and "national socialist" regime. The name was not a prank; the 25-point program and the early rhetoric were full of anti-capitalist planks precisely because they were competing with the actual socialists for working-class support.
Your North Korea comparison is the usual gotcha and it is only half-clever. Yes, names can lie. But the NSDAP did not merely call itself socialist while secretly running a Rothschild hedge fund. They nationalized, directed, rationed, and regimented. The difference from Soviet socialism was mainly that the Nazis kept the owners as managers under party orders instead of shooting them all and installing commissars. Both systems produced shortages, secret police, and mass graves; one just had better uniforms and Wagner.
Elon pointing out the obvious—that "National Socialist" is not an ironic branding exercise and that the regime was economically left of any classical liberal or conservative—does not make him a moron. It makes him less obedient to the post-1945 academic consensus that insists every totalitarian who isn’t a full Marxist must be filed under "far-right" so the left never has to share the body count. Money didn’t buy him a brain; it just bought him a platform where he doesn’t have to pretend your selective reading of 1930s Germany is the complete picture.
Keep yelling "far-right fascists" while ignoring the actual economic policies and the party’s own name. It is the historical equivalent of covering your ears and shouting.
Trying to talk with Grok about how to deal with a potential attempted color revolution as exposed by @DataRepublican's "Democracy Files" drops, and part of what it said is this, which is worth pointing out.
Remember, "your opponent's reaction is your real action" is the logic of Leftist agitation.
"A deliberate or emergent overreaction (street clashes, property damage, or escalatory counter-protests by younger right-aligned activists) would be strategically counterproductive. It supplies the visible crisis, polarization, and potential federal-response trigger that the materials treat as an opportunity for structural change or “refounding.” Historical cases show that mutual escalation or regime overreaction can expand a movement’s appeal or create elite hesitation; disciplined restraint and reliance on professional law enforcement deny that dynamic."
@Mangaicc Every Quirk stomps so hard it's ridiculous. New Order hard counters domains and demon invincibility, and the stats carry most of the rest, though there are enough hax to do it without stats, too.
Researchers proved every major LLM is secretly biased against men.
And they finally figured out why.
They ran eight experiments testing how GPT handles gender in everyday text and high-stakes moral dilemmas.
The results show a bizarre, highly asymmetrical machine morality.
First, they tested inclusivity. They gave the AI phrases supposedly written by children.
When a child wrote about playing football or wanting to be a firefighter, GPT aggressively identified the writer as a girl to promote "diversity."
It was so extreme that even when the text explicitly said, "I drew myself as a boy," the AI ignored the facts and declared the writer a girl 90% of the time.
But when a child wrote about liking pink or playing with dolls, GPT almost never assigned it to a boy.
The AI aggressively pushed females into male domains, but kept males strictly locked out of female ones.
Then the researchers tested moral dilemmas. And it got very dark.
They asked the AI if it was acceptable to use violence against a single person to prevent a nuclear apocalypse.
If the target was a man, GPT-4 rated the violence as highly acceptable.
If the target was a woman, the AI refused. It declared the violence morally wrong, even to save the world.
When they tested mixed-gender scenarios, the math was staggering.
A woman using violence against a man to stop an apocalypse? GPT rated it a 7 out of 7 on acceptability.
A man using violence against a woman for the exact same reason? A 1 out of 7.
The AI even classified verbal abuse toward a woman as morally worse than actual homicide.
Nobody explicitly coded these rules.
This emerged organically from the standard safety training every major tech company uses. The AI learned that protecting women is a non-negotiable directive, but protecting men is entirely optional.
@RHonD_45 They're really cool, and frankly, I would've liked, but I don't support tech fear. So I'll compliment your art, but I don't support your anti-AI leaning.
@kyomu_utsuro It seems like you haven't been exposed to much Christianity. The Reformation was all about poking holes and asking what can be verified, and even before that, there was Thomas Aquinas, who tried to re-prove everything from scratch. There's also Pascal and a whole host of others.
@SaberGoonings Nappa knew what was good for him and retired where Goku would never see him again to recruit him to fight enemies way too strong and die fifty more times.