Basic Glitch @ AcidicBasicGlitch @lemm.ee

I write a blog that focuses on public information, public health, and polic

---

Read more

Posts

134

Comments

367

Joined

4 mo. ago

Berlin would disagree with you. Regardless, even if you want to believe that protesting will do nothing, Waco should be all the history you need to know about to know what actually happens in the scenario you're encouraging.

That was over 30 years ago, against one government agency, on a compound armed to the teeth, and with a president in power that actually cared about how something like that might look to the rest of the world.

They seem really skilled at stirring shit up.

Kinda wonder if these assholes that are shooting people, (especially the one that knew he was being filmed yet still turned, lifted his gun, looked at the camera like he was on the fucking office, and shot that reporter in the back like he wanted the whole world to know what he was doing), are hoping to achieve something similar.

Literally who is doing nothing? All these people in the street? The cop that stopped to check on her? The people trying to spread information when it's being actively suppressed?

I would say encouraging violence when you know damn well what the outcome will be with civilians going against an entire police force, ice agents, public military, and likely private mercenaries, is about the fastest way to escalate this and exactly what trump is hoping for

Well then, I guess it must have been some other Pudutr0n. You're off the hook, for now...

I got this crazy idea: What if we could protest invasive policies the majority of people don't want enforced in a city without having an abusive dictator continuously escalate things, and indicate to other abusive pieces of shit there would be no consequences for this kind of behavior? What if we fired and criminally charged the asshole that shot this lady, and tried to encourage more cops to be like the only one that actually stopped to check on her to try and stop the bleeding?

Yeah I posted here a few days ago about trying to find a good alternative. I'm very sad to see lemme.ee go

This video is fucking insane: https://www.reddit.com/r/50501/comments/1l74ji0/i_hope_she_survives_this_and_got_medical_attention/

Sorry if this is a dumb question, still figuring things our.

How else would you use the platform without joining an instance? Just have a private server?

Idk I think it's pretty clear that they want to weaponize that idea to fit the Trump/RFK/Thiel narrative, but I do think there can be some truth to it. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Completely aside from their arguments about how this applies, there are examples where individuals in science have had to go against the common assumption to reach a new discovery.

Most obvious example that comes to mind is the guy that discovered the mirror box as a treatment for people dealing with phantom limb pain. Most people thought what he was proposing was a dumb idea bc it seemed way too simple.

I'm not 100% sure about actually preventing states from creating laws, but given what's happening in my city rn I would imagine, if this passes, it gives federal agencies and private companies the ability to legally ignore any city and state regulations that might be passed.

My city used to have a complete ban on facial recognition and predictive policing tech after they were caught secretly working with Palantir. In 2022, the mayor requested the ban be lifted and replaced with an ordinance.

Police in my city got caught violating the very weak ordinance that regulates how facial recognition is supposed to be used.

Since WaPo exposed them, they've allegedly paused using the tech. However, the tech is provided by a private company, and the city can't enforce their regulations on the state police and ICE agents that are still using the tech with zero oversight.

Given how we know states like TX have already signed up to have their national guard invade other states in order to enforce Trump's immigration policy, this could provide legal protection for the Texas national guard to come into a state like California and use it however they deem necessary.

They could start out by saying it's necessary to enforce immigration (which would be fucked up enough). Very quickly it becomes necessary to protect ICE agents from protestors, and they begin using facial recognition to track protestors and anyone loosely associated with protestors.

There's no way for the city or state laws to do anything about this bc the Texas National Guard have essentially been given blanket protection by a federal law to use AI to enforce federal immigration policy. Essentially, instead of the national guard being sent to southern states to enforce civil rights like what happened in the 1960s, the national guard from a red state would be sent into a blue state to enforce a dystopian cyber-surveillance nightmare created by the federal government.

Keep in mind this is just one possibility. Even without all that happening, the best case scenario of allowing a ban on state regulations, is you're providing legal protection for private corporations to collect data however they want and do whatever they want with it once it's collected.

Par for the course though. Orwell called it.

Federal intervention in states to enforce civil rights= unjust burden on states

Federal intervention in states to enforce immigration policy= send in the national guard to "liberate LA"

State regulations on AI= patchwork regulations won't benefit corporations the country

Federal regulations on AI= these regulations are underpinned by the values we believe are important. Surely we've already proven over and over again you can trust us to do what's right for corporations the country.

Never forget, corporations are people.

Exactly, they created this nightmare dystopia, sunk all their money into AI and if we don't allow them to just invade our privacy like it's their personal kingdom, and we exist to feed their data centers, they're fucked.

The entire economy is fucked, but that's 100% on them.

They wanted to just dive in head first, cut a bunch of jobs and replace everyone with AI. Who in their right mind would think that we should allow these people fewer regulations now, so they can make more money via exploitation of humans?

Exactly!

Oh regulations would cut into your profits? Boo fucking hoo

Lemmygrad.ml seems kinda obvious, but I have a completely naive question about lemmy.ml. Is it essentially the same? Why is it a controversial instance.

Based on just the sidebar description it sounds like a cool instance: A community of privacy and FOSS enthusiasts, run by Lemmy’s developers

But I also see a lot of people saying they have it blocked

Look dude, we have gotten so far from the actual point of my "wall of text," which you couldn't be bothered to read before arguing several more walls of text.

So let me just put aside the fact that I believe it's a bad idea to set a precedent where we rely too much on the government making constitutional amendments to reflect changes in modern society (not that it is not sometimes necessary, but that constitutional amendments should not be the default for improving America, otherwise you risk bad actors attempting to modify or remove protections and benefits that already exist in the constitution).

Let's also set aside that congress, currently controlled by Trump loyalists, want a constitutional amendment that would allow Trump to use the same strategy Vladimir Putin has used to make himself president for life and destroy democracy, and that this is exactly why I feel the way I do about constitutional amendments.

In a world where those concerns don't exist, I still have to ask why not just have it codified into law instead?

The short/uncomplicated answer for why Roe v Wade was never codified by something like the Women's health protection act, is because it didn't have enough support across both the house and Senate (bc once again, the issue used by the Heritage Foundation to create a false political division that didn't actually exist, has worked as intended. Yet most people are oblivious about who created that division, and the campaign they ran, that to this day, makes people feel so reactionary about things such as abortion. This is also the reason so many on the left worry they will lose moderate supporters, while taking their left base for granted, which they are now also beginning to lose due to voter apathy as a result of these people constantly trying to appease moderates.)

Given that we couldn't even get enough support for that to be codified into law, and putting aside literally everything else, why would you think it would somehow alternatively be easier to get enough congressional support to pass a constitutional amendments for any issue being used to keep people divided?

Thanks! I grew up southern Baptist and had no idea about any of that until very recently. Puts a very different spin on a lot of the things I grew up hearing.

Crazy to think that article is from 2014, and still somehow most people don't know this information!

Do you have any chest, arm or back pain? Do you have a pulse oximeter?

Can you go to a minor ER? If you hadn't said your heartbeat was off, I would say not necessarily a big concern at this point, but this also sounds similar to what happened to a friend of mine with an aortic dissection.

She thought it was food poisoning at first, finally went to a minor med, they refused to treat her bc her and sent her to the ER ASAP. She ended up in the hospital for several weeks.

Right, and who is in control of Congress right now? Any amendments they've brought up lately?

Amendment to Give Trump a Third Term Has 'A Lot of Support': GOP Rep

More scientists and data, but research quality in China has been very poor for quite some time, hence a lot of questions and concerns regarding methods, data collection, and number of retracted articles.

The entire idea of the "China virus" and the Trump/Republicans lab leak/attack on NIH funding to EcoHealth, and their collaboration with Wuhan Institute of Virology, hinged on pointing out the lack of lab safety standards in China that wouldn't have allowed the research to occur here.

On the flip side, now that Trump is in power, OSTP is focused on removing regulations to science and tech bc they argue they are slowing us down in the AI race against China.

Kinda seems like a load of BS especially considering AI data in China is very poor likely bc of the lack of regulations

https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2024/8/9/china-wrestles-with-quantity-over-quality-in-generative-ai-patents

Right, but it seems like they're getting nervous people might actually be allowed to vote in the midterms