If we view it through the lens of him actually wanting Putin to win and Zelinsky to lose because of personal insult its even easier. He merely needs a pretext to stop support. Zelinsky can pick between a pretence of peace followed by Russia regrouping and crushing them and total capitulation.

Easiest way is to front load so many demands that they never sit down. The important thing isnt even so much Russia winning as much as getting to snub Z.

His actions being that of an ignorant 4 year old rollin on whatever he was told last makes him easier to comprehend

You navigate them by finding out where their brain is broken and informing them of what words mean. In the ideal case some of them stop speaking incorrectly.

We aren’t computers we are people. We are having this discussion about the computer. The computer given a massive corpus of input is about to discern that the following text and responses are statistically likely to follow one another

foo = bar

foo != bar you lied to me!

yes I lied sorry foo = foo

The computer doesn’t “know” foo it has no model of foo or how it relates to bar. it just knows the statistical likelihood of = bar following the token foo vs other possible token. YOU the user introduced the token lie and foo != bar to it and it discerned that it admitting it was a likely response especially if the text foo = bar is only comparatively weakly related.

EG it will end up doubling down vs admitting more so when many responses contained similar sequences eg when its better supported by actual people’s thoughts and words. All the smarts and the ability to think, to lie, to have any motivation whatsoever come from the people’s words fed into the model. It isn’t in any way shape or form intelligent. It can’t per se lie, or even hallucinate. It has no thoughts and no intents.

You never have 100% of people using a word the same if only because some portion of the population is stupid and illiterate and you have both drift over time and geography. So say at a given time of a billion people 99.995% believe the definition is A and 0.005% believe B. Periodically people correct people in B and some of them shift back to the overwhelming majority and sometimes new folks drift into B.

It is clearly at that point, 99.995% A, correct to say that the definition of the word is A and anyone who says B is wrong. This doesn’t change if B becomes 10% but it might change if B becomes overwhelmingly dominant in which case it becomes correct. There is constantly small drifts mostly by people simply to stupid to find out what words means. Treating most of these as alternative definitions would be in a word inefficient.

Drift also isn’t neutral. For instance using lie to mean anything which is wrong actually deprives the language of a common word to even mean that. It impoverishes the language and makes it harder to express ideas. There is every reason to prefer the correct definition that is also overwhelmingly used.

There are also words which belong to a technical nature which are defined not by usage but a particular discipline. A kidney is a kidney and it would be one if 90% of the dumb people said. Likewise a CPU never referred to the entire tower no matter how many AOL users said so.

This is a long way of saying that just because definition follows usage we should let functionally illiterate people say what they want and treat it as alternative facts.

You can’t ask it about itself because it has no internal model of self and is just basing any answer on data in its training set

Still not a lie still text that is statistically likely to fellow prior text produced by a model with no thought process that knows nothing

The latter is the actual definition. Some people not knowing what words mean isnt an argument

It can be prevented by people paid 400-1000 per hour spending time either writing own paperwork or paying others to actually write it.

If Catholics, Evangelicals, etc etc etc all don’t deserve to be associated with Jesus who does again?

The other groups largely voted with evangelicals to make our country a fascist nation about 60 40. They don’t deserve as a group to be considered distinct

This could actually be serious until the second paragraph.

Because this is still supposed to be a nation of laws where we don’t murder you for reporting a murderer. A nation where someone can be openly killed and people must live in fear of saying anything would be manifestly unjust and might not be unjust in just the dimention you Imagine

deleted by creator

What is agency

At least in the US those are basically the same thing

Seems super likely that capitalism is going to be a major factor in our extinction. Maybe we could have a bit less of it and actually survive as a species

If your choices are a function of prior events and an emergent property of complex but deterministic processes where does agency come in? We are a complex deterministic process that simulates our own self to both predict a much more complex unconscious self and write rules to influence it going forward.

We call this process being conscious even when its writing just so stories after the fact.

People are locked up all the time for just possessing child porn without having abused anyone. This isn’t a bad thing because they are a danger to society.

You cant name one godamn thing that matters and you are completely weaseling out

Your choice of words is an analytical failure it says that the the will somehow sitting on top of all those processes rather than being a function of them.