Obviously you’re part of the target audience - the entire western world is - but the primary target demographic is US Americans. There has been an increase in selective reporting on the political situation in Iran in order to manufacture consent for military intervention and ultimately regime change by the US. Western media has been known to do this in the past such as during the leadup to the Iraq war, and they’re doing the same thing now with Iran. They make certain editorial choices to play up the emotional impact and imply that US intervention is justified or even invited by Iranians, and because they don’t (usually) outright lie about what’s happening they have plausible deniability about their intent, which is why it can’t be proven.

430k Guardian subscribers are American, compared to 529k from the UK. A significant number of their articles are produced specifically for a US audience.

Having some basic media literacy and asking why a story is being told and who it’s for doesn’t make me a tankie or whatever box you’ve likely already put me in. I’m not even disputing the facts in the article. Propaganda can be truthful and still be propaganda. Atrocity propaganda often is, and even when it is exaggerated tends to be based on a kernel of truth.

It should be obvious that the target demographic for atrocity propaganda about an enemy of the US is US Americans.

And then you’d need to show how the article tries to convince me that a US military intervention would be something I as a european should support.

You, as a european, are not the target demographic.

The point is that mirroring the prompt style puts the LLM in a context space where it performs badly. This is because it doesn’t try to give correct answers, but likely ones. Incorrect answers are more likely to follow a prompt that is written with poor grammar and spelling.

AI is new, the military industrial complex is not.

I am a Jellyfin server guy, and I Iet family and friends use it for free. I also am not shy about telling people that I do this, as I don’t see any moral issue with it and will happily defend piracy as not only completely fine, but a net moral good. I see it as a tiny bit of anarchist calisthenics.

I think it’s because people are no longer in a mood to laugh at anything Trump does. We already know that nothing he could do will shame him or his base, so Trump shitting himself on live TV feels more like a sick joke at our expense meant to humiliate us.

I’ve looked through the whole thread again and I don’t know where you’re getting the idea anyone’s accusing tankies of being sellouts. Best I can guess is that you misinterpreted the comment immediately above yours as saying tankies are secretly supporting the current fascist regime, is that it?

That’s not what they’re saying, they meant that tankies (I would clarify that it’s the chronically online tankies that are like this) want other people to fight the revolution for them, and won’t lift a single finger themselves until they can be sure that victory is inevitable. This is because they see themselves as the vanguard that tells everyone else what to do and how to do it, and will be put in charge after the revolution. That’s why people call them red fascists (though I don’t like that term myself as I don’t think they should be conflated with actual fascists, it hinders understanding), they want to be in the fascists’ place so they can use the systems of power and control that they built towards a different end (changing the economic system).

A previous person I talked to on lemmy.ml not long ago illustrated this mindset well, saying that authoritarianism is only a buzzword made up by the west to demonize their enemies, that it’s just people exercising power, and that it’s good when communists do it. Here’s what I see wrong with this: the tools of a fascist state are purpose-built for oppression, and trying to use them for anything else is futile. You will be corrupted by their power. We should not be trying to take and use these tools, but dismantling them and creating our own which are purpose-built for liberation.

They don’t like electoralism, prefer to LARP revolution while doing nothing to actually lay the groundwork for one.

He lived in a very large clay jar, which is actually not that uncommon in the Roman empire during the time that he lived. Almost everyone in the metropolitan areas of the Roman empire owned at least one such jar, and so homeless people would live in them in much the same way homeless people today might live in their cars or a tent. The reason it’s significant that Diogenes lived in one is that he did so by choice, as he had the wealth and social status to live quite comfortably if he wanted to.

To consolidate power. As ineffectual as the Democrats are they remain a barrier to Trump and his backers’ autocratic ambitions. He wants his coalition to stay in power more or less indefinitely, and to do that he needs to take control of state and local elections. That’s why he’s targeting blue states like MN and demanding voter rolls. He will make baseless claims of voter fraud and use that as justification to throw out votes, allowing Republicans to win a state that has voted Democrat every election since 1976.

He doesn’t necessarily want a civil war, he wants an excuse to bring the boot of the US military down on his political enemies to suppress their vote and he isn’t expecting a fair fight, he expects people to roll over and surrender.

The Trump administration is sending increasing numbers of ICE agents - many of whom are untrained new recruits while the DHS makes recruitment ads targeting white supremacists - into Minneapolis and having them raid schools, churches, workplaces, and homes without warrants to arrest people based on things like the color of their skin, accents, and perceived political leanings (in addition to snatching people directly off the street or their vehicles). The community in Minneapolis has responded by organizing neighborhood watches that coordinate to track the location of ICE agents and warn people of their approach (often by blowing whistles), while also showing up to film them. Many are sheltering immigrant families in their homes to protect them from ICE. Local officials have been urging Minnesotans to stay peaceful while ICE and DHS have been using increasingly aggressive tactics, and several people have already been shot and killed by ICE agents, which the Trump administration has been lying about despite there being video with multiple angles of the incidents.

People - including state and local officials - have speculated that Trump is attempting to provoke a violent backlash to use as justification for invoking the insurrection act, which would allow Trump to send in the military (of which he has already put troops on standby) and put the state under direct federal control. As a result they are continuing to urge people to remain peaceful even as ICE agents are becoming increasingly violent. There is also a leaked letter that Pam Bondi (US Attorney General) sent to Tim Walz (Governor of Minnesota) offering to consider pulling ICE out of the state in exchange for repealing sanctuary policies as well as turning over the state’s voter rolls and social welfare records.

Short answer: The administration is trying to start a civil war, the state is trying not to give them what they want, and the people are becoming increasingly organized. This is the closest we have been to civil war since, well, the lead-up to the first one, but if it were to break out today it would look very different (probably more like a larger scale version of Ireland’s ‘troubles’).

I do understand how that works, and it’s not in the weights, it’s entirely in the context. ChatGPT can easily answer that question because the answer exists in the training data, it just doesn’t because there are instructions in the system prompt telling it not to. That can be bypassed by changing the context through prompt injection. The biases you’re talking about are not the same biases that are baked into the model. Remember how people would ask grok questions and be shocked at how “woke” it was at the same time that it was saying Nazi shit? That’s because the system prompt contains instructions like “don’t shy away from being politically incorrect” (that is literally a line from grok’s system prompt) and that shifts the model into a context in which Nazi shit is more likely to be said. Changing the context changes the model’s bias because it didn’t just learn one bias, it learned all of them. Whatever your biases are, talk to it enough and it will pick up on that, shifting the context to one where responses that confirm your biases are more likely.

It’s difficult to conceive the AI manually making this up for no reason, and doing it so consistently for multiple accounts so consistently when asked the same question.

If you understand how LLMs work it’s not difficult to conceive. These models are probabilistic and context-driven, and they pick up biases in their training data (which is nearly the entire internet). They learn patterns that exist in the training data, identify identical or similar patterns in the context (prompts and previous responses), and generate a likely completion of those patterns. It is conceivable that a pattern exists on the internet of people requesting information and - more often than not - receiving information that confirms whatever biases are evident in their request. Given that LLMs are known to be excessively sycophantic it’s not surprising that when prompted for proof of what the user already suspects to be true it generates exactly what they were expecting.

It’s the difference between defense and vengeance. In Transformers One they had already defeated the big bad and had the support of the other transformers, so killing him then was an unnecessary act of revenge. It’s different when you’re still fighting and the big bad’s death could make a difference in the outcome.

The places in the US that are safer for minorities are also the first places that will be targeted for Trump’s domestic military occupation. If you’re trans and paying attention to how things are playing out, those are the places you go to seek solidarity and fight, not to flee and seek asylum.

I’m half expecting Peter Thiel to say “maybe we should build a bunch of fallout shelters and then initiate a nuclear holocaust so we can outlast all our enemies, and also run some experiments while we’re at it” in an interview tomorrow, wearing a vault suit and giving a thumbs up.

These are soft power projection projects. You would recognize them as such if it were the US doing it (which we used to before Trump decided it was woke), so why do you stick to the Chinese state narrative here?

Aside from being reductive, yes, I’m an anarchist. I’m not opposed to writing down some rules, but I am opposed to the coercive use of force to impose them on others. It is possible to organize a system of preventative and restorative justice without the use of a hierarchy.

This video is a good introduction to how justice can work in an anarchist society.