johannesvanderwhales @ johannesvanderwhales @lemmy.world

Posts

9

Comments

843

Joined

2 yr. ago

Just a few years ago you weren't downvoted just because someone disagreed with your opinion.

Yeah, no, "downvote is jot a disagree button" has always been aspirational on reddit.

Oh that sounds amazing.

I've seen thin slices of apple or pear with something like goat cheese.

Figs are amazing.

Is that an ErgoDash? I use the same. Good for people who want a fuller keyboard layout.

Aspirational talk isn't a bad thing.

Prefer column staggered, but yes they really make you wonder how we got stuck with the dominant keyboard configurations. Typing with linear columns feels way more natural.

Isn't a party realignment spurred by culture war stuff exactly what trump's broad strategy has been all along? I'm gonna guess that if you removed the fact that they are in a union, many teamsters members probably look a lot like typical trump voters.

Particularly true with birds

Spent enough time in the punk scene to know some people are very serious about it.

What if they work for a PMC? I'd probably judge that. Or worse, what if they're a CEO?

I don't know honestly. Really, with AI it would be pretty difficult to be foolproof. I'm thinking of the MIT card counting group and how they played as archetypal players to obscure their activities. You could easily make an account that upvoted content in a way that looked plausible. I'm sure there are many real humans that upvote stories positive to one political party and downvote a different political party. Edit: I mean fuck, if you wanted to, you could create an instance just to train your model. Edit 2: For that matter, you could create an instance to bypass any screening for botters...

If there were, upbotters would use it to verify that new bottling methods weren't detectable. There's a reason why reddit has so much obfuscation around voting and bans.

Is it possible to get a report of which posts are being voted by them?

Wow, it's probably a one in a million chance that you replied that to someone who knows the reference.

This is ancient.

Haven't played it so I have no opinion on its quality, but that came out a decade ago.

The fact that this comment is getting upvoted is why I fucking hate this place.

But there is no public debate commission, and no public funding going to these debates. It's two campaigns making a deal with a private TV network to show them on TV arguing with each other. Should there be a public debate commission? And if there were, would it be appropriate to feature more candidates? Maybe! But as is, the only real issue is that the vast majority of the public does not care about these candidates.

The debate is literally an agreement between Donald trump and kamala Harris. There is no neutral debate commission involved. This doesn't really make sense.

Those candidates are free to have their own debate if they think they can convince someone to put them on TV.

Edit: Also is Jill Stein a "moderate"?