Roasted Temujin

Blood oath with the strange 🦷

[Jim Stewartson, Decelerationist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🇺🇸 @jimstewartson]

You’re a pathetic sellout liar like every other amoral billionaire douchebag who showed up to suckle at the teat of Orange Caligula.

YOU DON’T SIGN PRESIDENTIAL ORDERS IN AMERICA.
YOU DON’T REGULATE YOURSELF.

You are forever stained by your appeasement.
Fuck you.

[Jay in Kyiv @JayinKyiv]

Ripping apart NATO for his Russian master, Trump says the UK, the Baltics and France are not allowed to attend next month's NATO summit in Poland.

A reminder, the Baltics are next on Putin's list and all 3 cannot attend.

[Covie @covie_93]

So Republicans want Jack Smith to go to jail for investigating trump crimes instead of trump going to jail for committing those crimes???!!!?!?

[Illia Ponomarenko 🇺🇦 @IAPonomarenko]

And if we extrapolate the events of 1938–1939 onto those of 2021–2022, then in our parallel reality Hitler was initially allowed to bite off the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia — but when he once again massed his troops to take the whole country and attacked, he unexpectedly suffered a crushing failure outside Prague and, even more unexpectedly, became completely and hopelessly bogged down there in static warfare for years.

And in this parallel reality, instead of being betrayed by the Western democracies as it was in 1938, Czechoslovakia did receive military and economic assistance that, while rationed and limited, was nevertheless substantial, and developed an even more powerful and advanced defense industry and an army that managed to heroically stand up to the Reich on equal terms.

As a result, at least to this day, Czechoslovakia has held out.

Hitler did not get Czechoslovakia’s industry and resources. There was no subsequent invasion of Poland. Perhaps the conditions for the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, in the form in which it was concluded in 1939, would never have arisen either, meaning that Stalin’s Soviet Union would not have had the opportunity to divide Eastern Europe together with Hitler.

There was no defeat of France, no Battle of Britain, no occupation of Norway, no expansion into North Africa. Mussolini would not have gone much farther either without his catastrophically bogged-down ally. Japanese expansion in Asia and the Pacific might have taken a completely different course as well.

The Holocaust could not have happened in the historical form and on the scale that it did. There would have been no need to storm Omaha Beach.

And so on, and so on, and so on.

World War II as we know it might have stumbled, for Hitler, into a years-long slog over the ruins of border villages, just as Putin is still banging his head against Mala Tokmachka.

Think about that before asking yet again: why help Ukraine at all?

And don’t assume that Putin stopped after his own “Munich.” Like Hitler, he stopped where he was stopped by force.

But nothing is over yet.

[Michael MacKay @mhmck]

Elbridge Colby loves Putin and Russia even more than Trump does. He made sure NATO allies Britain, France, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania weren't invited to a NATO meeting.

Moscow's divide-and-conquer war against the West is embodied in this Quisling.

https://t.co/gK2MTtut34

[alex jungle @JungleAlex13227]

Tourists face legal action after being filmed riding a nesting sea turtle in Oman. What do you think? Do they deserve prison for this?

[Roasted Temujin @roastedtemujin]

@JensenHuang 💩

[Lyudmyla Kozlovska 🇪🇺🇺🇦 @LyudaKozlovska]

CHAT CONTROL 2.0 BLOCKED AGAIN, THANKS TO YOU!

What happened yesterday: the @Europarl_EN blocked the deal pushed by the @EUCouncil.

The Council wanted:

(1) "voluntary" scanning of all private chats under "search plans" approved automatically unless an authority vetoes;

(2) administrative authorities, not courts, ordering providers to scan private messages, not limited to suspects, using AI with massive false positive rates;

(3) making the failed Chat Control 1.0 mass scanning regime permanent, while admitting it is not effective, as we discussed in my previous posts.

Your voice to parliamentarians made a huge difference again: the Parliament refused scanning of private communications, stating it must remain limited to persons linked to child sexual abuse, not everyone by default or under a blanket licence, as Council proposed.

The Parliament also closed the back door where "risk mitigation" rules could force providers into scanning under threat of fines.

What did pass: a preliminary agreement on scanning publicly accessible content for known child abuse material. This was proposed by the Parliament as the effective, targeted alternative.

We still wait for the text to see what this means and will inform you in the coming weeks.

This defense proves again: our voice matters when it is vocal, with your support!

And we will need it again in November, so please follow the updates.

Now, it is important to call or write to your MEP and your government to say thank you to those who stand on the side of privacy.

They need to see you are watching their move. Please repost.

[Paul Walsh @Paul__Walsh]

The things they’re building are still AI data centres. Renaming them is a convenient way to distance them from the laws, planning restrictions, and public opposition attached to AI data centres.

I love how transparent they are and how they definitely don’t treat everyone like 4 year old children who don’t understand what a computer is.

We can definitely trust them.

[Jim Stewartson, Decelerationist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🇺🇸 @jimstewartson]

The transformer architecture allowed autoregressive token predicting to be parallelized which made it more suitable for GPUs.

The problem is that GPUs are actually terrible for AI because they require moving huge amounts of data just to compute a single token. It’s not the calculation that takes the majority of the energy at this point. It’s the data throughput.

With a GPU you have to move enormous state from memory to compute, perform an absurd amount of math on it, and move it back to memory. This is a limitation of the Von Neumann architecture (separating memory and computation) and it will never work as the only substrate for AI.

To make something that learns, you need a substrate that can do calculation and memory in the same location. That’s how brains work. They’re analog. Physics does the calculation, not a digitized simulation on a remote chip.

With transformers, Jensen Huang saw an opportunity to present his product as the only solution to AI—but in reality he and the frontier labs have constructed its greatest barrier to progress.

Data centers are purpose built for enormous racks of GPUs.
But GPUs are not the answer to AI. It’s just a cool demo that spun out of control.

Jensen Huang has created Enron with obsolete technology. This industry is going to implode.

[GOŁƊ @vidxn_]

NAOMI KLIEIN to SAM ALTMAN:

"...you ingested the entire written output of human civilization without consent, without compensation and without credit to build a system whose primary commercial application is eliminating the jobs of the people whose work you consumed.

You are not 'liberating human creativity' -- you are strip-mining it and selling it back at a markup while calling the theft 'training data'."

[Kate from Kharkiv @BohuslavskaKate]

Francesca Albanese: "I'm scrutinized even when I sneeze." No, Francesca, you are criticized for insisting that the victim of an illegal invasion shouldn't have weapons to defend itself. Now you are just playing the victim to avoid accountability.

​"I think that there are many people who are exploiting the suffering of the Ukrainian in order to force Europe to arm itself." Funny, I thought Russian drones over Europe were already a pretty good reason to arm up.

​This is a full-on Russian propaganda narrative designed to convince you that peace is only possible if you bow before Russian aggression and hand over pieces of your territory without resistance. But don't be fooled: peace in Europe can only come from strength and the determination to defend itself.

[Garry Kasparov @Kasparov63]

My thanks to everyone expressing their outrage and concern. Of course there are millions of people whose lives are threatened by Russia every day in Ukraine, and Ukrainian victory remains the best form of security for me, my colleagues, and all of Europe.

[Roasted Temujin @roastedtemujin]

@RnaudBertrand However, seeing the unbelievable cerebral decay of western audiences - no more reading, no more serious cinema, tons of doomscrolling and netflix slop. It's a matter of a decade for this kind of content to grab western audiences aswell.

[Roasted Temujin @roastedtemujin]

@RnaudBertrand Western audiences will see it for what it is: absolute slop. It's not that chinese are stupid - at all. It's just that the level of oppression that the chinese people were subjected to in the last century and how little diverse content they absorbed, allows them to digest slop.

[Paul Walsh @Paul__Walsh]

Technical analysis to explain why the UK government is using the word "comprehensive".

TL;DR: "Comprehensive" means identity verification for everyone so children can be banned. When adults are banned they can’t return.

Identity verification is designed to kill online anonymity. When accounts are tied to real people, behaviour can be tracked, scored, predicted, and permanently restricted. Apply that across social media, games, messaging and app stores and you’ve built population-scale surveillance under the banner of child safety. Privacy is destroyed. Parents lose control. The government gains the power to exclude identified people from civic online spaces.

Here’s my breakdown of Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy’s speech along with my technical analysis:

🇬🇧 "We will be the first in the world to introduce a comprehensive social media ban for children".

💡 Everyone knows the UK is not the first to introduce a social media ban for children. So what does she mean?

💡 For that statement to become true, the government would need to mandate something that hasn't yet been said out loud in Australia. A "comprehensive" social media ban means everyone has to verify their identity.

💡 She’s effectively saying "We will be the first in the world to introduce identity verification for everyone". There’s no other technical or legal explanation.

🇬🇧 "where abusive content is not just removed, but removed forever".

💡 The only way to achieve that is to ban repeat offenders permanently. That requires knowing who wrote or shared the content. Technically, that means linking people’s identities to what they post and share. Once an account is tied to a real identity, creating a new account with a different email address no longer works. If you’re banned, you’re excluded for good.

🇬🇧 "Women’s rights are human rights, and human rights are non-negotiable".

💡 I agree. But the government wants to use that as a trojan horse to take away everyone’s right to privacy, including women who wish to remain anonymous. Privacy is a human right, which by their own admission is non-negotiable. They want to decide when human rights are accessible.

🇬🇧 "But, friends, shouldn’t we be ashamed that decades of violent indifference has come to this? Having to remove our children from social media altogether because we cannot protect them from harm".

💡 Any parent who believes their child is unsafe on social media can restrict social media using the parental controls built into today’s smartphones.

🇬🇧 "Because our online spaces live in the palm of our hands and the cables that run under our feet. They’re a civic space, like any town hall or high street".

💡 The UK government arrests around 30 people every day over communications offences involving things posted online. If the government gains the ability to permanently exclude identified people from online services, people will censor themselves.

(In Australia, Ireland and the US, they use "robust" age assurance to mean identity verification because no government wants to say what they really mean.)

💡 Please know this.

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy and the rest of the government and their advisors, are not technically savvy enough to understand basic technical aspects of this subject.

I advised the British government and its main child-safety advisers during the first Parliamentary Inquiry into Online Child Protection in 2012. That process led to opt-out filtering across UK telecom networks and ISPs.

They’ve been looking for ways to force identity verification for years. I know because I challenged them about it directly during formal in-person meetings and private briefings in London.

My BBC Newsnight interview at the time showed me demonstrating how poor parental controls were. Unfortunately, we didn’t discuss what I thought of the government’s approach to default-on pornography filters, which meant adults had to actively remove restrictions to access blocked content.

💡 Smartphones today give parents the technical controls governments claim they need legislation to provide. Parents can block apps, block websites, restrict content, approve downloads, control purchases, and set time limits and curfews for their own children. They’re a hundred times better than they were in 2012.

💡 That removes the child safety justification for banning social media.

💡 A digital identity system kills online anonymity.

Removing anonymity is a core technical requirement for governments to gain digital surveillance because once identity is linked to activity, behaviour can be monitored, analysed, predicted, and controlled.

If the UK government rolls this out across social media, games, messaging, app stores and other online services, it creates the technical foundation for population-scale surveillance and control.

Countless schools and many parents already use mobile based parental controls. Banning social media for everyone’s children takes rights away from guardians and parents.

If I was on Newsnight today, I wouldn’t demonstrate weak parental controls like I did in 2012. I’d demonstrate how good they are now and ask why the government feels the need to ban social media instead of educating parents about the controls they already have.

---

I’ll publish my full technical analysis of Chat Control today. Writing this here to hold myself accountable. I’ll summarise it here, but Substack gives me the space to break down the entire system properly.

Plain English. No jargon. Free.

[Covie @covie_93]

trump's "friend" kim jong-un tortured US citizen Otto Warmbier to the point where he suffered a neurological injury and died shortly after he returned to the U.S.

[Jessica Berlin @berlin_bridge]

Whatever they have on him, it’s a doozy

[Jim Stewartson, Decelerationist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🇺🇸 @jimstewartson]

Phew. I really don’t know how to break it to America, but the economy is currently balancing on a Ponzi scheme that is on track to cost $10 trillion over the next five years—although it will never get that far.

These are conmen—just lying to everyone’s face.
Every word. Every fake “calculation” is a fucking lie.
There is no new “paradigm” of. computing. The LLM stack is the laziest, most inefficient hardware platform ever created. It’s absolutely insane how little innovation there is.

Elon Musk is on heavy drugs here. He’s just nodding out and mumbling his usual science fiction stories that literally make zero sense. There will be no GPUs in space. He just wants that trillionaire status back.

Jensen is trying to shove as many of his garbage GPUs into the pipeline before everyone figures out this whole goddamn thing is tulips and GPUs are a stupid ass way to do AI in the first place.

This entire industry is a malignancy created by greed and alternate reality.

It’s going to create the biggest crater in economic history because America is full of gullible morons.

Anyway.

[Jay in Kyiv @JayinKyiv]

Trump again blocks previously agreed weapons transfers to Ukraine.

Ihor Romanenko, former Deputy Chief of the General Staff of Ukrainian Armed Forces, explains that following his conversation with Putin, Trump blocked transfer of 3,000 air-to-surface missiles intended for targeting Russia's ballistic missile launchers.