Comfy Apocalypse @ComfyApocalypse

A Tale of Two Cities

American courts have repeatedly held that underage boys owe child support to their adult female rapist. It’s called the patriarchy or something.

ℌ𝔢𝔬𝔥ℭ𝔶𝔫𝔦𝔫𝔤𝔖𝔱𝔢𝔳𝔢 🇺🇸🦅🐺✝️⬜ @emperorthesteve

a month ago

Did you know that in America if a woman rapes a little boy and gets pregnant she can sue him for child support and the courts will side with her?

29 209 3K 340K 238

@0xMerp not only muscle mind, its everything you get better at things when you day dream about it theres like 100 study of imagination of / day dream of _ insert type of activity or sport or whatever _ and its a very significant effect but today, no one day dreams

They don’t actually fear the AI, what they fear is you using it to destroy their control over you.

We cannot allow Silicon Valley to monopolize AI. Monopoly building is their core business model. It is what they know how to do. Take something that begins as an open frontier, pour billions of dollars into it, centralize the infrastructure, capture the distribution channels, lock everyone into a handful of platforms, and then position themselves as the indispensable gatekeepers between ordinary people and the technology itself. We watched this happen with search. We watched it happen with social media. We watched it happen with mobile computing, cloud infrastructure, digital advertising, and online commerce. We cannot allow it to happen again with artificial intelligence. The stakes are simply too high. AI is rapidly becoming a new layer of civilization itself. It will increasingly mediate how people search for information, write software, create art, conduct research, educate their children, build businesses, practice medicine, communicate, and make decisions. Whoever controls that layer acquires enormous power over everything built on top of it. If five corporations control the models, the compute, the interfaces, and the rules governing what those systems are permitted to say and do, then five corporations effectively become the librarians, teachers, editors, programmers, researchers, and increasingly the intellectual gatekeepers of civilization. That cannot be our future. There is something particularly insulting about being told that this technology somehow belongs exclusively to the corporations that trained the models. Trained them on what? Us. Our books. Our websites. Our photographs. Our conversations. Our code. Our research papers. Our journalism. Our art. Our forums. Our public archives. Decades of accumulated human knowledge and creativity were vacuumed into enormous datasets and transformed into these systems. Silicon Valley did not conjure this knowledge out of thin air. The models are standing on a mountain of human civilization that billions of people spent generations creating. These systems also do not live in some magical digital cloud floating above the earth. They run on our electrical grids. They occupy enormous data centers built on our land. They consume energy generated by our infrastructure. Their chips move across supply chains protected by our governments and ultimately by our people. Their companies enjoy legal protections, capital markets, universities, roads, communications networks, and political stability created and maintained by the civilization around them. After drawing upon all of that, we are supposed to accept a future where a tiny priesthood in Silicon Valley owns the intelligence layer of the digital world and rents access back to everyone else on whatever terms they decide? No. The models belong to all of us. The knowledge underneath them is our inheritance. The infrastructure supporting them exists inside our civilization. The people whose lives and work generated their training material are not incidental to this story. They are the story. This is why open models matter. Local models matter. Open-source tooling matters. Independent compute matters. Alternative AI companies matter. The ability to download a model, modify it, run it yourself, build on top of it, and decide for yourself what it should do is not some niche hobby for programmers. It is one of the most important technological questions of our generation. We need thousands of AI companies, thousands of models, thousands of applications, and millions of people experimenting freely with this technology. We need models running in massive data centers and models running on laptops in basements. We need businesses, churches, schools, families, researchers, developers, and communities building AI systems around their own values and their own needs. No central committee in San Francisco should determine the intellectual boundaries of artificial intelligence for eight billion people.

One thing I have noticed from the jurors who have come forward to "speak out" is the way that they consistently speak about their personal feelings. "I found the prosecution's opening statements to be very, very harsh." “I found it to be biased right out of the gate." "I found it to be kind of unprofessional and kind of without a heart… We didn't find any compassion in the prosecution." He (Reddington) was "funny and entertaining" and "very entertaining to watch." “His compassion towards Lindsay Clancy was amazing.” "I really just felt like she was so deep in it that she couldn't see her way out." "I started filling out the forms, I was so excited." " I just felt like the only way to get justice for Cora, Dawson and Callan, and Patrick and her parents and anyone else that was close to this was to get her the help that she desperately needed." This is how grown adults discussed a trial that involved a triple filicide. They treated the courtroom like a reality show, had the arrogance to insert their own opinions as expertise, and joked about their "hero's journey". They talked more about "compassion", or where it was lacking, than the actual facts of the case. What this sounds like is a lot of highly emotional behaviour, and very little actual reasoned consideration of the evidence.

@Lorgarwasright2 Big E. Also im tattling on Lindsay to Konrad

@Lorgarwasright2 “Heroic story” “Story where hero is also evil” “Can a hero sometimes be evil” “Is morning after pill dangerous for health” “When is it too late to use morning after pill”

America is not an all-star team. America is a country. With a native people. And a culture. And this, not your hypothetical all-star team, is what needs to be safeguarded. American is not special because it contains geniuses. America is special because the behavior of the average, non-genius heritage American creates a civilization where progress is possible. It is understandable for you to overvalue talent, because of everything you have built, and helped others to build. But you could only have built it in America. And that is not because of America's supply of geniuses. It because you can build here, without getting beaten to death with rocks for witchcraft. Without bribing eleventy-billion bureaucrats. Without being shut out of every opportunity because they have to be given to the Glorious Leader's third cousin. Without being killed by the preexisting elites simply so they can take your stuff. Need I belabor the point, or do you get the idea? Yes, Ayn Rand was directionally correct, but she didn't have the whole picture. The Great Work is not built by the Great Man. It is built by the Great Team, led by the Great Man, in the Permissive Place. Genius, even genius with drive, is helpless by itself. In all likelihood, the greatest mind in human history spent his life whacking at the dirt with a stick trying to make crops grow, and died at age 32 of a fever that could have been cured by five dollars and thirty-seven cents worth of antibiotics. Because he did not live in the Permissive Place. So, recruiting all-stars is not paramount. Because all-stars or geniuses, are not the bottleneck. Geniuses are everywhere. I know plenty of geniuses. Some of them are driving buses or coaching high school football. The permissive building environment is the bottleneck. When you try to make America into an all-star team, the inevitable result is you being required by law to kidnap and molest a seal. Because people are not generic, blank-slate talent-in-a-can. They bring their culture and values with them. As well as all their relatives. And yes, they will, in fact, vote for the left. Because cultural indoctrination trumps individual intelligence every damn time. They will vote for President Mamdani, and so will their wife and their brother and their cousin and their dear old mama who barely speaks English. They will believe the promises and they will vote for the takers. So you can't afford to bring them here, because without America, there is no Mars. Yes, I am fully aware that you wish to explain how I don't understand how difficult hiring is, how expensive payroll is, how urgent the need. The problem is that everybody else wants to use that same excuse. A basic rule of thumb for evaluating moral actions is the question "What would happen if everyone else did the thing I am doing right now?" Except we don't have to ask that question. Because we are living the answer.

Elon Musk @elonmusk

3 months ago

This is essentially true. However, it is possible to filter for exceptional people from any country. The problem for the left is that exceptional people mostly won’t vote for them.

2K 4K 35K 6.1M 989

Socialists imagine a class struggle. In their made-up fantasy the CEO is in competition with low level workers, the wealthy entrepreneur is stealing from the underpaid nurse. In reality, workers do not compete vertically they compete horizontally. Entrepreneurs compete with entrepreneurs. Investors outbid each other. CEOs are benchmarked against other CEOs. Nurses are hired from a pool of nurses. Etc. The CEOs pay has no correlation to the entry level workers. The Football star on £300K a week isn’t linked to the person selling drinks in the stadium. A biotech entrepreneur raising VC capital isn’t paid relative to a cleaner. What is linked is the demand and supply dynamic of each role. If a company places an ad for a qualified truck driver and 150 people apply for the role, then the company knows it does not need to increase wages for that role. If the company has an open role for months, it is forced to look at the compensation package. Same for a CEO. A board representing shareholders would like to hire a CEO for a lot less if they could. Their dream scenario would be to hire a CEO who brings in institutional investors, attracts top executives, drives innovation and growth, keeps margins steady and is a good public face for the business even under pressure. It turns out there aren’t a lot of these people looking for work and if you want one you have to pay more than other companies are offering. The class struggle isn’t vertical it’s horizontal. CEOs are in competition with CEOs. Retail workers are in competition with retail workers. Demand and supply dynamics set the price. Sure you can say that a CEO want’s profitability and would like wages to be lower BUT it’s not up to the CEO - demand and supply tension sets the price of workers. An Airline like RyanAir would like free pilots if they could get them but they can’t… so they pay the market rate. The reason incomes are rising at the top and falling at the bottom is not class warfare. It’s technology and globalisation. Technology makes basic jobs simple, remote or fully automated. At the same time tech makes executive roles more leveraged, more important and more valuable. A CEO used to run a smaller organisation. Today a CEO who’s 2% better on a $5B company is generating $100M more. Seems sensible to try and pay a few million to get $100M. Globalisation has put workers from all over the world in completion with each other - downward pressure on wages. Globalisation has given CEOs more market opportunities to explore - upside opportunity to unlock. The rich are not very interested in buying houses that poor people own. The poor are not buying up the homes the rich want. They are separate groups living separate lives. Try finding the genuinely rich people whose strategy is to hoard normal residential homes - it barely exists as a thing. About 85% of landlords are people who own 1-4 properties. Super-landlords (100+ properties) are 0.2% of landlords and own a tiny fraction of the 30M homes in the UK… and they’re heavily taxed. Class warfare isn’t real. It’s an imagined war in the minds of socialists. Demand and supply dynamics are real. To the degree it is measured in class, it’s a horizontal competition not a vertical one.

Gary Stevenson @garyseconomics

4 months ago

There's a difference between normal people spending money and really rich people spending money. And it explains why our economy is failing.

322 679 3K 1.5M 284

@kunley_drukpa We donnt tak like dat

@kunley_drukpa @LudditeHacker I read this in Mark Rutte’s voice

@PancreasNo

@bitcoinpanda69 No one seethes harder than a st*pcel

@beinlibertarian Good day to you too sir

@ShitpostRock2 Btw those ships have gene stealer cults on them

@bitcoinpanda69 And that’s not hyperbole — that’s fact.

@bitcoinpanda69 Maybe it’s not a courage thing, maybe they just have god awful taste. Bless them

@bitcoinpanda69 I believe thats the reason the ‘mad inventor/genius’ archetype is so prevalent these days. Frankenstein, Fabius Bile and Cawl (40k), Kirin Jindosh (dishonored), etc. More often even where the genius is anonymous and the focus is purely on the fallout e.g. FEV in ..Fallout lol

you need to understand that there is a coordinated, intentional effort to convince you that having children is a bad idea, unethical, evil even this is not organic. no civilization in history has ever told its people not to reproduce having a child is the single most rewarding experience any human being can have, nothing else comes even close you will never feel ready, nobody ever does. who cares rawdog it, figure it out later. these people despise you and everything you stand for. outbreed them

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next