Skip Navigation

queermunist she/her

@ queermunist @lemmy.ml

Posts
2
Comments
3852
Joined
3 yr. ago

/u/outwrangle before everything went to shit in 2020, /u/emma_lazarus for a while after that, now I’m all queermunist!

  • Obviously (eyerolls and gestures to all the prey animals clearly doing well due to their regulated hunting).

    Cattle are doing well too, but calling their herds "strong" would be absurd. Hunters are just harvesting a free range crop, pretending like this is good for nature is an excuse.

  • There's a reason people call it an ear-gasm.

  • No he doesn't. He can just make shit up! That's what he's doing to send soldiers to US cities, after all.

  • Aiming for the best obviously doesn't strengthen the herd, even if they miss.

    Compare this to wild predators, who never aim for the best. They aim for the weakest prey which is how they actually strengthen the herd.

  • So they target young and healthy animals? That's no good either.

    They need to be targeting the weak, the sick, or the old. If that's not happening then it isn't strengthening the herd.

  • There's a certain inertia that celebs have where they are famous, in part, because they're famous. Being attractive and having talent only goes so far, but once someone gets big enough they become institutions onto themselves.

    She just has to stay normal and not wierd (a surprisingly hard task for celebs) so she doesn't ruin it.

  • The hardware is specialized for chatbots, it's not just something they can plug-and-play for other use cases. That means using it for other computing tasks is even less efficient per kWh and per litre of water, which will make it hard to justify the resource requirements.

    Surely some of this hardware can find new life, but assets will be stranded.

  • Deer hunters (another example I've heard of this strategy to "strengthen the herd") aren't going after the smallest, weakest, or sickest deer. They want the biggest and most impressive deer with the most meat.

    Is it really not the same for kangaroos? I'm skeptical.

  • Unless they specifically hunt the weakest and sickest and oldest kangaroos (y'know, like actual predators do) they aren't strengthening the herd at all. At best they're just randomly killing them, but at worst they're killing the most impressive specimens and actually actively harming the herd by removing the strongest members. They're weakening the population.

  • The people warning us about Trump's list were silent about the other lists. Do you think Elissa Slotkin cared if Biden kept lists of anti-Zionists protesting the genocide? There are definitely some people who have been concerned about the lists of targets the government keeps no matter who the President is, but Senators don't give a shit unless their people are on the list.

  • So it was fine when only radicals and minorities were on the list?

    All Trump has done is expand the repression to normal people. It's your problem too, now.

  • The most optimistic take I've seen: AI is a drain on the entire economy that sucks up all investment and this is why the rest of the economy is basically in a recession. Once the bubble pops, investors will flood back into the real economy and correct the problem.

    I'm not optimistic.

  • He's just saying the quiet part out loud. I don't believe for a fucking second that previous administrations weren't making lists of political enemies.

  • Well hold on.

    Do you have a flag??

  • When did I blame the media? What would I have even blamed them for?

    It's clear you're just looking for a fight. Goodbye.

  • I half expect this to be another pump-and-dump scheme - he tells the insiders he's going to make this announcement so they can trade on the tariff threat before everyone else, then tells the insiders he's going to walk it back so they can trade on the relief before everyone else. All the insiders can make money both on the downswing and the upswing while the rest of us suffer.

  • I'm pretty sure the common phrasing is "a page out of the playbook" not "page one"

    It's not clear that they understand we've been reading from the playbook for decades.

  • I'm pretty sure the common phrasing is "a page out of the playbook" not "page one

  • I never blamed the media? My point is that the playbook has been open for decades: stolen elections, legalized bribery, the Patriot Act, the creation of ICE, NSA wiretapping, subsidized mass surveillance, torture programs, extrajudicial assassinations, RICO charges for protesters, mass incarceration, police brutality, genocide, etc etc.

    The expression is "a page from the X book" anyway. There's no reason to call this page one. We're on page 1488.