I didn't get a notification even though you mentioned me in this post. I think you'd need to mention everyone in a comment instead.

I'm in favor of moderation of this community, obviously avoiding censorship of particular views and instead just enforcing the existing rules and keeping things somewhat civil and on topic (both posts and comments), removing trolls. Good posts can also be stickied if it's not done excessively.

I support u/Thisisnotanexit's application to be a moderator as well (if that's worth anything).

Yes, if it's done with some sanity according to the rules. Some additional rules might be required - for example to keep posts on topic.

OK but what's the conspiracy? That homosexuals are working together to rape immigrants? Or that immigrants are working together to kill homosexuals?

OK but nothing about the fact it is happening tells us anything about it being a conspiracy. This post is just pointing out how bad the consequences of the conspiracy are.

But this video doesn't indicate any of that is a conspiracy even we were to generalize from this thing that happened

What does this have to do with conspiracies?

Legalman's articles were the best. Unfortunately he stopped writing and his website is no longer online so I have to point people to archives instead: https://web.archive.org/web/20200225103240/http://www.thetruthaboutthelaw.com/how-it-is-done-to-you/ I wish he went back to writing because I find his spoken arguments are much weaker and longwinded.

In this podcast he pretty much explains my own view that ordinary people should be able to go after criminals just like police do. The problem is with exactly how this is implemented, which he barely addresses. Legalman seems to hold my view that a legal system should still try vigilantes to check they were in fact responding to a crime and their actions were proportionate. But he seems to think if you kill someone who wronged you then you should get a standard criminal trial where evidence beyond reasonable doubt is needed that not only did you do the killing but that it was unprovoked or disproportionate.

But it's really easy to create a shred of doubt about that by saying the person you killed did something bad that nobody else witnessed - they raped you, threatened you, reached for your gun, stole your wallet. The prosecution would then have to prove that something didn't happen, which could be much harder than proving something did happen. So this system would allow criminals (posing as vigilantes) to get away with so much by making up excuses that can't be disproved. It might still be better than the current system, but not great.

An alternative system would be to make the vigilante prove that the crime they were responding to happened - not beyond reasonable doubt, just according to the preponderance of evidence. But how do you prove someone raped you, threatened you, reached for your gun or stole your wallet? Most crimes would have a decent amount of evidence that could be used to attempt exoneration of the vigilante but sometimes there wouldn't be much evidence at all. So this system would result in good vigilantes being punished. Furthermore if only a preponderance of evidence is needed then vigilantism becomes a way to inflict serious punishments on people without evidence beyond reasonable doubt needed, albeit with risks to the vigilante.

I think a more nuanced approach would be needed. For example, the vigilante needs at least some small amount of evidence to corroborate their story unless their story is one which is unlikely to have left evidence, in which case the vigilante has to be beyond suspicion - there is no evidence the vigilante had a motive to harm that person and they are not thought to be of bad moral character by the community.

The quality of posts here has definitely been very low. I don't see a lot to do with Trump but a lot of very speculative and unprovable assertions and brain damaged posts. I don't think wild speculation and bad ideas should be banned or deleted but not enough people are downvoting them.

Also we could do with more high quality posts. The highest quality posts would assert a conspiracy or similar claim and explain it in detail with links for support. Or it could be a link post to an article that does this. Other decent quality posts could be links to news articles and other pieces of evidence to support conspiracy claims.

How does EL imply ALL? Is there a Hebrew lexicon which suggests that?

I don't think vessel and vassal are related etymologically, nor to the word "all":

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/vessel

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/vassal

What makes you think the "el" in vessel has anything to do with the Hebrew word El?

This has always been their excuse for taking away more freedoms.

You may as well give the website your phone number because it can already recognize you from your browser fingerprint (but not across browsers or connect you to a phone number and other people with your number in their contacts). And then you may as well tell them your name. And then you may as well give them your personal details because they can already find out from the government or credit reporting agencies. And then you may as well upload your government ID. And then you may as well do the live selfie (with your consent for police databasing and AI training in the small print) because they already have your photo.

Let us ban carrying guns outside because you're not allowed to open carry or take them into gun free zones anyway. Give us your guns because you're not allowed to take them outside anyway. Let us criminalize harming burglars because you don't have weapons anyway.

You may as well get digital ID because you already have physical ID (where the government doesn't know when/what you use it for and isn't able to make it stop working in certain circumstances) anyway.

Jesus was literally a Jew. So were all his disciples. Even after his resurrection they still considered themselves ethnic Jews following Judaism.

If you asked for those "thought processes" after it had given you its conclusion then they in fact have nothing to do with how the LLM arrived at its conclusions. LLMs have no way to look inside themselves and understand their own processes. They just make up words they predict you want to hear. So the explanation of its reasoning after the fact is simply lies - a post hoc rationalization of an irrational process.

If instead you asked the LLM to reason one step at a time and refrain from drawing any conclusions until the end, then it would be generating the next bit of text based on the earlier ones and you would in fact get an idea of how it arrived at its conclusion. But you wouldn't be able to drill down on how it made any of those individual steps - it's just based on a giant matrix of numbers. You could reset it and ask it to do the same thing again in more detail, but it would come up with different steps and often a different conclusion and you wouldn't learn much about the first time you asked it.

This is assuming we're talking about an LLM that generates text linearly and doesn't have an internal process of generating its answer first then refining it one or more times before presenting it to you. Otherwise you wouldn't have a good way to make it show something akin to a reasoning process.

Lots of non-Jews had already expressed interest in AI and trying to make it, like Alan Turing and Christopher Strachey. It's debatable what the first AI was and who its inventors were anyway. So AI would have been a thing by the 1960s with or without Jews.

Technological progress refers to technology getting more advanced. I'm not saying it's a good thing - far more often than not it's bad.

If they hadn't done it someone else would have. The problem is nothing to do with Jews, it's the culture of technological progress without consideration of the consequences.

A long list of companies now controlled by David (and Larry) Ellison: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_Paramount_Skydance

Sounds like they're using AI to identify records in different databases that belong to the same person so the records can be merged. Next time you go to the doctor he might be looking at someone else's medical history thinking it's yours, especially if your name is common.

They have to cave a little to public pressure and also keep up a pretence of caring about our health. Also putting massive taxes on tobacco products gives the government more money to misuse and putting restrictions on widely condemned products sets a precedent for restricting products people actually want (like ivermectin during COVID).

Chill dude. Sorry not everyone is as enlightened as you are. More information is always a good thing and complaining about it makes you sound like a fed.

Ellison's CEO pick Safra Catz is also an Israel-born Jew who communicates with Israel's heads of state and donated to Marco Rubio's 2016 presidential bid: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safra_Catz

It was founded in 2007 by what or offer? Why don't they know which? And an offer of what? Or is "Or" the symbol for some currency or a new chemical element?

Apparently he's used that line many times, and he copied it from Robert Bloch: https://quoteinvestigator.com/2021/09/26/heart/

If you actually watched the video you'd find he said Epstein was working for both, and it was mainly Israeli stuff he was involved in

Couldn't get very much from this clip as nothing was really explained and the other guy kept interrupting. What is the evidence that the government set things up for this crime? I don't even know anything about the crime scene since I haven't been following this story.

Edit: Oh, is this not about Charlie Kirk? The video doesn't tell me anything.

And every single time when they said this it was true. People were getting lazier and lazier the whole time.

First they got rid of child labor and workhouses, then they reduced work to five days a week and 8 hours a day. Then most of the jobs moved to offices so you didn't have to break a sweat and could waste time chatting at the water cooler. Then everyone had to get equal pay for the same job so there was no incentive to work harder. Then you got to work from home and waste even more work time not working. And now people outsource their thinking to AI and pass it off as their own work.