Reminds me of this:
I think atproto is a good protocol, but god bluesky-the-company is dogshit.
This shows why it’s so easy for conservatives to reverse Uno the language of social justice, painting themselves as the victims of oppression and liberals / women / minorities / immigrants / LGBTQ+ people / anyone else who exists without their consent as oppressors. They refuse to admit that words mean things, and that things are more important than words.
It’s not a lack of reading comprehension. It’s a lack of reality comprehension.
Yep.
Oh, your strategy is… invent a new vocabulary to describe yourselves and your stuggles?
… and then do nothing other than ‘promote discussion’ and ‘raise awareness’?
Well, what are fascists, historically, really good at?
Oh, right, its uh, perverting language and also pretending to be something they actually aren’t, so as to be more soundbite palatable, basically, more broadly appealing, more difficult to counter argue / “debunk” without exhausting yourself.
Sure would be neat if anyone learned anything from history, ever, but nope, thus the tragicomedy goes on.
Wait. Hold on. Are you blaming marginalized groups for inventing language to describe their marginalization? And then talking about it?
You know, like how democracy is supposed to work, where you ‘promote discussion’ about a problem until you’ve convinced a critical mass of voters that there is a problem and they need to vote for policies that fix it?
Is the implication here that fascists, these experts at manipulating language in dishonest ways, would be helpless if they didn’t have new words from marginalized groups to pervert?
Because I doubt fascists have any problems with attacking the people they hate, whether those people make up new terms or not, or, for that matter, whether those people talk about their marginalization or stay quiet to try and avoid fascist attacks.
Wait. Hold on. Are you blaming marginalized groups for inventing language to describe their marginalization? And then talking about it?
Nope.
I am blaming any of them them, and/or their allies, who seemingly think / thought that that alone would be sufficient to stop fascism.
This is an immensely naive way of thinking.
You know, like how democracy is supposed to work, where you ‘promote discussion’ about a problem until you’ve convinced a critical mass of voters that there is a problem and they need to vote for policies that fix it?
The entire strategy of fascists is to pervert how democracy is “supposed to work”, thus revealing the state as its true nature, a monopoly on ‘legitimate’ violent force, that can be made to do nearly anything with that force, once it is fully perverted.
Is the implication here that fascists, these experts at manipulating language in dishonest ways, would be helpless if they didn’t have new words from marginalized groups to pervert?
No, the implication is that you can’t fight fascists with words alone and win, you have to be able to credibly match the power and force they wield, by more clever means, than just talking at or about them.
You have to cut off their funding, you have to jail them for their crimes, you have to actually present a workable solution to the the economic plight of people who are likely to become fascists (conservatives), you have to address that the root cause of fascism is the decay of a corrupt capitalist democracy, and by ‘address’, I again mean with actual actions, actual policy changes, or extragovernmental means like a mutual aid group.
Because I doubt fascists have any problems with attacking the people they hate, whether those people make up new terms or not, or, for that matter, whether those people talk about their marginalization or stay quiet to try and avoid fascist attacks.
They don’t, but fascism is largely a cancer that grows, much more so than it is some kind of innate, unchangeable aspect of… well at least most people.
So, the cure is to start at the root and treat the causes of the problem, comprehensively.
Don’t do that?
Sorry, but historically, then the fascists win, untill some later war or mass armed rebellion or resistance basically kills or jails them all, and then also literally sends them to reeducation camps.
(EDIT: Well, maybe not literally ‘reeducation camps’, physically isolated camps, but at least some kind of comprehensive, compulsory, de-fascizing, reeducation system)
I am not trying to say the burden of stopping fascism lies squarely on the shoulders of those most likely to be persecuted by fascists.
I am saying that any of such people (myself included) who believe that … just raising awareness and promoting discussion alone, for its own sake, as the ends instead of means to a more actually useful ends…
Anyone who believes that alone will work is a fool.
Again, because this is what history shows us.
It’s also why the right can’t meme
I think it’s the other way around. The right is incredibly good at memes - because memes presume underlying facts without having to prove those facts, and, by portraying them humorously, imply that anyone asking for proof of the underlying facts is taking the meme too seriously.
Remember last summer when the internet was flooded with memes about Haitians eating people’s pets? That whole vicious racist slander based on a single false report that in any other context would have been absolutely unacceptable, but anybody who pointed out “hey, this is vicious racist slander based on a single false report and is absolutely unacceptable” got accused of being humorless wokescolds taking a joke too seriously?
It’s why the Trump White House posts so many viciously racist and contemptuous memes on Twitter. It’s why the fucking Department of Homeland Security likes to hide the numbers 14 and 88 in its social media posts. Because it puts the left in a Catch-22: if they call out the memes, they look like humorless enemies of free speech, and if they don’t, it normalizes racism even further.
The right has mastered the art of the meme. The left may be winning the meme Olympics, but the right are fucking professionals.
I’m so confused reading all this.
Their argument is something like this:
People might say something like “ai is incapable of thinking” or “ai is stupid”, but if you replace the word “ai” with something like “women”, you’re saying something unacceptable.
So they’re attributing personhood to AI.
Before it has come anywhere close to meaningfully mimicking conciousness.
Are they stupid?
AI believers believe that stringing random words together is equal to consciousness, they absolutely are stupid.
Perhaps because it reflects their level of consciousness.
Ah makes sense now! So if I change the meaning, then the meaning changes. Man, that’s brilliant!
If we’re going to focus on form instead of content, it’s amusing that “if you say mean things about ai then you’re a bigot” is the exact same form as “if you say mean things about Trump then you’re a terrorist.”
the post: https://bsky.app/profile/hailey.at/post/3m2f66lgh2c2v .
The person is a bluesky engineer.
Not only that, she introduced mass surveillance to Bluesky and is brainstorming further methods of such in response to getting clowned on so hard.
Rainbow painted fascist.
Scratch the surface too hard, oops, its another shitlib.
God I am so tired of idiots confusing identity politics and virtue signalling with being left wing, but apparently, most people really are just skin deep.
Yeah, I’m not touching bluesky’s servers after this.
Migration luckily works pretty well on atproto.
Thanks for surfacing this. Holy shit.
And to think all this could have been solved by bsky simply hiring some communication specialists and treating the current events like a crisis, and acting like their users are the police.
Well. ‘Engineer’. You know it’s all vibes to them.
Hoo boy. The original person being reposted continues on their original post that they believe we cannot be certain that genAI does not have feelings.
How do we have people wasting their time arguing about software having feelings when we haven’t even managed to convince the majority of people that fish and crabs and stuff can feel pain even though they don’t make a frowny face when you hurt them.
I agree odds are low on, say, GPT-4. Though if that changes we wont notice, and that’s vaguely scary.
Just complete the delusional circuit and tell them you can’t be sure they aren’t an AI, ask them how they would prove they aren’t.
I love how this is so close to a cogent critique of people literally just repeating racist jokes but using a word swap to make them acceptable, and then the “(whatever that means)” hits and it all falls into place.
.Hailey.at may currently be dating an AI and feels insecure about others judging them, so they must convince themselves that their linguistic vibrator has a soul.
One of the replies talking about someone celebrating Hitler’s death regularly, even if they’re a survivor of the camps, is mentally ill?
Related chain in the sack: https://awful.systems/post/5776862/8965566
https://youtube.com/shorts/aHoUPEhjbN4
The only good take I’ve seen on this matter.
Oh, hey, that’s the “Mikhail Gorbachev Caused Skibidi Toilet” guy
I refuse to click that link and instead choose to believe that Mikhail Gorbachev caused Skibidi Toilet unironically.
It’s pretty unironic. It’s a legit chain of culture and economics that leads from Gorbachev straight to Skibidi Toilet as they evolved and morphed over time from external influences.
It’s also the guy who insists “chat” is a fourth person pronoun. Frankly I now go out of my way to avoid his stuff because that take was so ludicrously stupid I no longer trust anything he has to say.
