I stay away from right wing trash on principle. Sounds like you’re lining up for that designation as well lmao.

Imagine talking about Russia positively and criticizing others for opinions “outside the approval of the empire” lmao

Then these are the dumbest people in France.

It’s a valuable study because it’s attempting to empirically explain how we’ve all been feeling these past 15 years

Stopped going there when they were on the extreme wrong side of a local labor dispute. Get fucked Chipotle.

I’m wondering if antagonizing NATO actually has the purpose of pulling more Chinese support for their war. As you said, traditional hostilities against NATO would end in a loss of a lot and potentially a power grab of a NATO friendly government in Russia that China doesn’t want.

Then again a collapsing Russia is a land grab for China.

I agree, it’s extremely stupid reasoning but I haven’t seen anything intelligent from Russia since getting an asset into the US presidency.

I would imagine they wouldn’t want to antagonize NATO like they’re doing unless they’re planning on Trump using it as an excuse to have the US pull out of NATO, but even that seems farfetched.

Russian Oligarchic leadership may have pushed themselves into a corner, internally, that’s lead to a death cult around Putin. The fact that they failed their perceived quick operation in Ukraine back in 2022 suggests that the people making decisions are either extremely stupid or being told lies from the bottom up. Both are signs of a flailing autocracy.

I’ve seen speculation that it would be an internal face-saving maneuver where losing to NATO is preferable to losing to the Ukrainians. Theory being that it’s the most likely scenario where Putin doesn’t get ousted and KGB‘ed to the back of the head.

This comment contexualizes Meta‘s propaganda about AI, which the article doesn’t do. Mentioning Meta‘s AI blitz along with the secretive nature of this would have strengthened the article IMO.

Appreciated.

The article clearly says very little, except this:

But what Meta did with all this data is unclear.

No shit Zuck doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt. The point is this article says very little and reads like a Fox News quality fear piece. Futurism is better than that.

This seems like it’s Meta testing the boundaries of contemporary chatbots so they can refine their stuff so they don’t continually get sued. Given the absurdness of modernity, where people are using these bots in-lieu of other social interactions, this seems like a worthwhile stress test. Assuming they share the findings and don’t sell them which is likely asking too much of a corp.

This article, and especially the headline, seems like it’s fearmongering without substance. It’s like the headlines from anti-science tabloids describing an research article in the most biased terms possible. Thus, this article leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Am I missing something?

Edit: related article(https://www.engadget.com/2209332/meta-is-facing-1-4-trillion-in-state-lawsuits-over-social-media-addiction/)

Geez, two huge earthquakes across the world seemingly hours apart. That a crazy, and sad, coincidence.