Lobachevsky's recent activity
-
Comment on The truth about AI (specifically LLM powered AI) in ~tech
-
Comment on UK and Denmark are demanding overhaul of European immigration laws – Keir Starmer and Mette Frederiksen argue populists will continue to gain ground if something isn't done soon in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentI guess I just don't understand why you brought up random American/British politicians' actions in response to me saying that immigration issues are very real and if the moderates don't address...I guess I just don't understand why you brought up random American/British politicians' actions in response to me saying that immigration issues are very real and if the moderates don't address them the votes will (do) go to the extremists and the populists. If the issues were tackled in the first place, there would be no populist rhetoric embellishing them, no propaganda targeting them, no one to latch onto the problem. Populism functions if there's an underlying issue to tackle. That's all I'm trying to say.
-
Comment on UK and Denmark are demanding overhaul of European immigration laws – Keir Starmer and Mette Frederiksen argue populists will continue to gain ground if something isn't done soon in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentThis isn't a math problem that has a correct solution, it is a policy decision that some will like and some won't. Thus when I say solution, I mean in the eyes of the electorate (which is the only...Sometimes incapable, sometimes unwilling or uncaring. Perhaps we're misunderstanding each other on a subtlety of meaning here: to me, if it's ineffective, it's not a solution. Solution implies that the problem gets solved - a failed attempt, and especially an attempt made in bad faith that never could have succeeded, is not a solution. That's the point I'm making: that they're providing targeted lies, not actual solutions.
This isn't a math problem that has a correct solution, it is a policy decision that some will like and some won't. Thus when I say solution, I mean in the eyes of the electorate (which is the only thing that matters at the end of the day).
Just look at the US right now
The conversation is about Europe. Immigration is a whole different thing in a country that consists of almost nothing but immigrants.
Large quantities of documentary evidence:
Choosing those links because they're the two political systems I have the most direct experience with. There are many, many more examples.I mean I am aware that it's a factor. I don't know why it would be the primary factor though and those pages don't really help, especially since both countries are pretty far removed from mainland Europe when it comes to attitudes towards immigration.
I have no way of knowing whether you're being realistic and talking in good faith because I have no idea where you're located and what police reports you're suggesting I look up
Sweden. Here you can read the police reports. It took me a bit of time to find the exact bomb because apparently there have been dozens of explosions in 2023, but I believe it was this incident. It was linked in a member of an infamous Foxtrot whose leader is an Iranian-born Kurdish Swede that I believe goes by "Kurdish Fox".
Of course it is only the one incident I personally witnessed, it isn't otherwise particularly special. But it was pretty fucking loud and woke me up in the middle of the night about 5 km away from the blast site. I would say it's the kind of thing that could make a voter pretty worried without any propaganda kicking in.
Once again, I don't even find Sweden unsafe or violent. I think it's one of the safest countries in the world. I love immigrant areas more than any others. I also don't really jive with the local culture or mentality, so we probably view this in a very different light.
And your response is to... tell me that some actual issues exist? I genuinely don't understand why you seem to object to me saying "the far right are lying about the issue, we need leaders who will address reality, whatever that reality may be, without legitimising the propaganda".
Because none of it matters if the left/center is also lying about the issue by pretending it's a non-issue, a small issue, an issue that isn't worth our time or legislation, or that anyone who finds it genuinely concerning is racist, bad faith or a propaganda bot.
As far as I'm concerned, the phrases "pretending that it is an unequivocal and universal good" and "being a bit too optimistic about immigration" are genuinely synonymous.
Case in point.
I raised some serious, legitimate, well documented factors that are driving the rise of the far right (by far the most significant of which is that misplaced fear and anger over economic insecurity), to challenge the idea that an overly optimistic view on immigration is the primary contributor (or an unrealistic view, or an unequivocally good one, or whatever wording you would prefer - I'm honestly not trying to put words in your mouth, I'm just speaking in my own voice here)
I fundamentally disagree with your wording and reiterated mine. I didn't mean it to be insulting, I apologize.
-
Comment on UK and Denmark are demanding overhaul of European immigration laws – Keir Starmer and Mette Frederiksen argue populists will continue to gain ground if something isn't done soon in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentNot sure why you say it's a myth. You pick a party that aligns the closest to your values. It's a perfectly valid voting strategy and kind of how democracy is supposed to work. It's not like you...But... they won't. They'll use it as a wedge issue to drive their agenda, they won't actually solve any of the underlying concerns. I think that's an incredibly important distinction, because extremist parties rely on people swallowing the whole "oh, well I don't agree with everything they say, but I do think it's important to address <whatever issue>" myth so that they can appeal to less extreme segments of the population.
Not sure why you say it's a myth. You pick a party that aligns the closest to your values. It's a perfectly valid voting strategy and kind of how democracy is supposed to work. It's not like you typically get to pick everything you want.
It's like the utterly disproven "conservatives are better for the economy" lie that somehow keeps being repeated year after year. Saying that people are turning to the populist parties because they present a solution is like saying they're turning to the populist parties because they'll get a yacht, a gold bar, and a pet unicorn - it's transparently untrue, and repeating the lie is reinforcing it.
Which is why we need leadership with the ability to distinguish genuine issues from broad stroke "immigration bad" bullshit in the wider conversation. It's one thing to address actual, reasonable concerns in a way that's truthful and proportionate to their impact; it's quite another to legitimise the one dimensional narrative pushed by the far right by acting as if their monotone "immigration bad" rhetoric is accurate or made in good faith. That was the whole paragraph I wrote - not a single word about pretending anything is a universal unvarnished good, but a lot of words about addressing the situation confidently and accurately rather than legitimising the bullshit. A call for nuance and accuracy.
What is your point exactly? That extremists or conservatives are incapable of providing solutions? Of course they are, they might be ineffective or you might dislike them, but they are solutions. Anyway, I'll just repeat that yes, it would be nice for moderates to provide those solutions and naturally it would be grand if the solutions, whoever they come from, are effective. At some point extreme and ineffective solutions are better than doing nothing, which is why populism is a thing in the first place.
Really? It's not the propaganda networks? It's not the centralised, agenda driven media? It's not the misdirected anger over rapidly growing economic inequality? It's not the fabricated culture wars? It's not the destabilising effect of Russian agitation?
Genuinely where does this even come from? Most people aren't terminally online on twitter listening to Russian bots, they live in a neighborhood and they see it change. You can clearly see immigrant areas here for instance, there are very clear parallel societies (I myself am part of that because I couldn't give a fuck learning the local language to a significant degree), the cultural clash is readily apparent if you talk to a handful of locals for more than 10 seconds, gang violence exists and is driven primarily by second generation immigrants with a knack for recruiting 15 year olds because they get a slap on the wrist after committing murder. All of these are just facts on the ground. A surprising number of individuals in my circle have heard gunshots and I myself have heard an bomb go off (all of this is easy to verify because police reports are public).
Now, again, I myself don't really consider these as issues because I'm used to way worse and the reality of restrictive immigration laws makes my life much harder. I am simply telling you this to illustrate that from the perspective of someone who was born and lived in the country all their life and now sees things that just didn't happen before and sees how things take a turn for the worse, it makes complete sense to be against immigration as it was done. None of this has to do with fabricated culture wars or Russian propaganda or whatever agenda you seem to think is at play here.
The most important part in the rise of the far right is actually just some people being a bit too optimistic about immigration?
That's not at all what I said. I will repeat, it is pretending that it is an unequivocal and universal good, that anyone who has a problem with it is a xenophobic racist moron who fell for the Russian propaganda, and proposing 0 solutions for the issues that arise.
-
Comment on UK and Denmark are demanding overhaul of European immigration laws – Keir Starmer and Mette Frederiksen argue populists will continue to gain ground if something isn't done soon in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentYes, that is what I said in my answer to "how giving the populists more of what they want is supposed to prevent them from gaining more ground". If the moderates don't provide solutions, populists...The issue here is that the extremists are stoking fear, pushing propaganda, deliberately creating division along racist and xenophobic lines, straight up fabricating an enormous amount of talking points - and then couching it in the language of exactly those "real world issues" that you mention to sanewash what they're saying. And the extremists absolutely will not provide solutions, either, they'll provide performative cruelty as a distraction while they make the underlying economic problems worse by enriching themselves and their in group.
Yes, that is what I said in my answer to "how giving the populists more of what they want is supposed to prevent them from gaining more ground". If the moderates don't provide solutions, populists and extremists will - and often just as you say.
legitimising the broad stroke "immigration bad" bullshit
As I also said, immigration is bad. For some. And good for others. I would argue that pretending that immigration is an unequivocal and universal good is the main cause of the rise of right wing extremism, at least in Europe. It's just a policy, with its pros and cons. For me personally, open borders would be the best. Doesn't seem to be what most people in Europe prefer.
-
Comment on UK and Denmark are demanding overhaul of European immigration laws – Keir Starmer and Mette Frederiksen argue populists will continue to gain ground if something isn't done soon in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentBecause it's not some fantasy completely invented out of nothing. It is a response to real world issues caused by immigration that are felt by many. If the moderates don't provide any solutions,...Even so, it’s curious to me how giving the populists more of what they want is supposed to prevent them from gaining more ground?
Because it's not some fantasy completely invented out of nothing. It is a response to real world issues caused by immigration that are felt by many. If the moderates don't provide any solutions, the extremists and the populists will.
IMMIGRATION GOOD
Some immigration is good, some immigration isn't good. Also not universally good, there will always be winners and losers.
Here's an easy tildes way to envisage how immigration can be bad: imagine if a bunch of billionaires moved to your town, bought all of the property and raised all rents 10x.
If I were in charge I’d fling all the borders wide open and just let people go where they wanna go, live where they wanna live, and be who they wanna be.
Sure, I'd love that too since I happened to be born with a shitty passport and am now an immigrant which is causing me all sorts of issues. But if you've ever lived in an apartment building with shitty neighbors you understand that having a somewhat restricted community with people around you can be a good thing (for you). And in a democracy you have to contend with the 51% who are probably the people who are already settled there and thus benefit from restricting their community.
-
Comment on How Europe is gearing up to follow Australia's teen social media ban in ~tech
Lobachevsky LinkIs this implying that parents need their governments to pass laws to prevent their kids from doing something? Seems to me that if your parents don't consent, you already need to dodge their...unless they have parental consent
without parental consent
requiring under-14s on social media to have parental consent
Is this implying that parents need their governments to pass laws to prevent their kids from doing something? Seems to me that if your parents don't consent, you already need to dodge their restrictions. What's stopping you from dodging further?
an outright ban on under-13s
Last I checked every freaking forum had a "confirm you're at least 13 years old" checkbox already.
Social media platforms including TikTok, Facebook and Snapchat already have a minimum age of 13
...
Why does it seem like all western democracies do is pass useless legislation to appease public opinion?
Actually no, more like passing legislation that appeases public opinion while at the same time putting more restrictions and justifications on surveillance on the internet.
-
Comment on Swiss reject millionaire inheritance tax in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentWell sure if you want to tell me when you said "millions" you actually meant "hundreds of millions" we can even talk about that being a more reasonable proposition. I still take issue with "life...Your life wouldn't be any different if you'd have 900 million instead of 2 billion.
Well sure if you want to tell me when you said "millions" you actually meant "hundreds of millions" we can even talk about that being a more reasonable proposition. I still take issue with "life wouldn't be any different". Of course it would be massively different, the billions aren't a useless pile of money sitting in a vault being eaten up by inflation, they're capital, they're companies, assets, which would be what, nationalized I guess?
Man I still cannot believe I am forced to relate to billionaires here.
Hybrid cars were taxed at a lower rate in this country and I voted against my "best interests" to get that increased even though it would cost me personally
- The kind of money you were taxed for couldn't buy you entire successful enterprises that you could then use to do what you think is good
- I'm guessing it wasn't a tax saying basically "CptBluebear and his peers pay up, everyone else gains". Bit of a difference here I think.
-
Comment on Swiss reject millionaire inheritance tax in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentI just completely disagree with your definition of a major sacrifice. Life isn't just about comfort either.I just completely disagree with your definition of a major sacrifice. Life isn't just about comfort either.
-
Comment on Swiss reject millionaire inheritance tax in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentI understand tax brackets. I was referring to Anyway whatever your feeling is, you should also understand then that no one in their right mind would want to be subjected to this and would avoid it...I understand tax brackets. I was referring to
If it was to reduce your billions to millions so we can all have a little more then no, I don't particularly feel bad about it.
Anyway whatever your feeling is, you should also understand then that no one in their right mind would want to be subjected to this and would avoid it with whatever means possible. It's just cost cutting, we all practice it.
-
Comment on Swiss reject millionaire inheritance tax in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentIf you're going to use absolute values then a billionaire is paying many orders of magnitude in taxes than any of us, so the whole point is moot. That's not even accounting for jobs and businesses...If you're going to use absolute values then a billionaire is paying many orders of magnitude in taxes than any of us, so the whole point is moot. That's not even accounting for jobs and businesses and such that participate in the economy. Anyway 90% networth is an insane figure and it's completely understandable to want to avoid losing that.
I don't love rich people and especially I don't love dynasties who keep inheriting ad nauseam. I just think that if other people make your life worse in a country it's a perfectly adequate response to leave and everyone should be able to without making major sacrifices.
-
Comment on Swiss reject millionaire inheritance tax in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentI had to move because other people were making my existence in my home country actively worse and I was better off leaving. It wasn't not nearly as bad as losing 90% of networth like you're...I had to move because other people were making my existence in my home country actively worse and I was better off leaving. It wasn't not nearly as bad as losing 90% of networth like you're proposing, but it created a lot of problems in my life. Genuinely never thought I would feel bad for billionaires but here we are.
-
Comment on Swiss reject millionaire inheritance tax in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentRefer to my other comment:It indicates they feel absolutely zero loyalty or obligation towards the people and country they used to build their dragon's hoard.
Refer to my other comment:
I guess I don't really at all understand what you're talking about considering I was essentially forced to leave my home country and yeah, people like me are frequently labeled as cowards, traitors, useless, etc. I just didn't expect to see this attitude on progressive western tildes of all places. The more you know.
-
Comment on Swiss reject millionaire inheritance tax in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentI don't see what their level of wealth has to do with anything besides having an option to leave where others might not. The person alleged that wanting to leave your country is worthy of scorn, I...I don't see what their level of wealth has to do with anything besides having an option to leave where others might not. The person alleged that wanting to leave your country is worthy of scorn, I find that to be to be distasteful, simple as that.
Being annoyed at billionaires is a progressive western hobby.
Cool, but maybe watch what you're annoyed at? It's kind of important.
-
Comment on Swiss reject millionaire inheritance tax in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentI guess I don't really at all understand what you're talking about considering I was essentially forced to leave my home country and yeah, people like me are frequently labeled as cowards,...I guess I don't really at all understand what you're talking about considering I was essentially forced to leave my home country and yeah, people like me are frequently labeled as cowards, traitors, useless, etc. I just didn't expect to see this attitude on progressive western tildes of all places. The more you know.
-
Comment on Swiss reject millionaire inheritance tax in ~society
Lobachevsky Link ParentHuh? Why? Living in a country shouldn't be a prison where you aren't allowed to leave.The absolute gall of them to threaten to leave the country is infuriating.
Huh? Why? Living in a country shouldn't be a prison where you aren't allowed to leave.
-
Comment on An AI-generated country song is topping a Billboard chart, and that should infuriate us all in ~music
Lobachevsky Link ParentI guess you are using some technical definition of plagiarism. When I say plagiarism, I simply mean copying verbatim. This is not at all relevant to the AI discussion because AI is by definition a...If I start printing and selling copies of the Harry Potter books verbatim (without a licensing agreement), but I make it clear on the front of the book that I’m not the original author, then this isn’t plagiarism, specifically.
I guess you are using some technical definition of plagiarism. When I say plagiarism, I simply mean copying verbatim. This is not at all relevant to the AI discussion because AI is by definition a neural network (its weights), it cannot possibly be a verbatim copy. And if you want to say that you can get it to produce a verbatim copy, I'll respond with the fact that Photoshop can be used to produce a perfect copy of any copyrighted image.
-
Comment on An AI-generated country song is topping a Billboard chart, and that should infuriate us all in ~music
Lobachevsky Link ParentWhere does the notion come from that you can post anything you want online and then exclusively decide exactly how people use it? Plagiarism (taking things as is) is a very specific case that we...Where does the notion come from that you can post anything you want online and then exclusively decide exactly how people use it?
Plagiarism (taking things as is) is a very specific case that we forbid. What does this have to do with AI training? Moreover, for 10 years everyone was free to copy this content, save it on their computers, run algorithms, study that data, transform it, make it into something else, sell the results and it was fine. Why is AI training any different? -
Comment on An AI-generated country song is topping a Billboard chart, and that should infuriate us all in ~music
Lobachevsky Link ParentBecause it's absurd to demand compensation based on some internal intentions you may have had 10 years ago that weren't explicitly stated.Because it's absurd to demand compensation based on some internal intentions you may have had 10 years ago that weren't explicitly stated.
-
Comment on An AI-generated country song is topping a Billboard chart, and that should infuriate us all in ~music
Lobachevsky Link ParentI meant as opposed to making anyone that have already trained a model on their works retroactively pay for it.I meant as opposed to making anyone that have already trained a model on their works retroactively pay for it.
I think there's a really funny way LLMs are treated with the highest level of scrutiny instead of comparing them to what was there before. I can now near instantly get ideas for office party activities, a large draft of an announcement or a statement, format things in whatever way I want instantly, ask for help with text or code with clarifications and corrections, most importantly all of this is completely customizable by whatever it is I want, it's generalized to the extreme. Does it matter then that it is not a literally perfect answer, ready to be copypasted? No, because a) I can just ask to change things and b) before there was no such thing whatsoever, other than googling and hopefully landing something that fits your use case (frequently also flawed) or I would have to convince or hire other people to help out, again with all of the downsides of working with another person.
Thankfully, beyond online discussions of hatred and obsession in real world practical applications are mostly what matters.