lmmarsano

atp

• Association of Tennis Professionals
• Adenosine Triphosphate
• Advanced Threat Protection
• Access to Patients
• Adult Treatment Panel
• Available To Promise
• Area to Protect
• Airline Transport Pilot
• Army Techniques Publication
• Ambient Temperature and Pressure
• Automatic Train Protection
• Ask the Professor
• Army Training Program
• Acceptance Test Procedure
• Authorized to Proceed
• Australian Technology Park
• Advanced Travel Partner
• Antitachycardia Pacing
• All Tomorrow’s Parties
• Authorization to Proceed
• Alternative Transients Program
• Advanced Technology Program
• Automated Theorem Proving
• After Tax Profit
• ⁝

here's a fun activity: *define [it][raa]* not because I don't know, but because it's pretty clear to anyone who's written a few mathematical proofs that *you don't know* [raa]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

As I understand it, the character was reappropriated from an oh exploitable publicly funded game Pathways (play it) designed to inform students about part of a public counterterrorism program for voluntarily deradicalizing extremists without legal consequences for opting-out. The player plays a new college student, Charlie, who runs into scenarios. First scenario: on a sketchy social media website their new friends use, a video is shared, and the player is offered choices:

• download the video
• ask about the video
• tell a trusted adult

If the player chooses to download

Charlie downloaded the video and shared it with different people online.

Charlie felt relieved and happy that people were liking the video and also sharing it.

Deep down, Charlie wasn’t sure if this was the right thing to do, as some of the ideas in the video were extreme and violent.

It’s important to remember that downloading or streaming certain content can lead to a terrorist offence conviction.

Apparently, download implies more than that, the game bundles unnecessary actions together, & merely downloading/viewing content has legal risks. The other choices aren’t much better: an extremist tells Charlie people who care about their country will download & share the video or an adult explains extremism, so Charlie simply doesn’t download it. Charlie can’t just view the video to judge it: great message for self-reliance & developing the criticism to participate competently in democracy.

I’m guessing the other scenarios play out similarly. At some point, Charlie is courted by Amelia, a nationalist teenager with purple hair who Charlie can refer to the deradicalization program.

I can see why derision of this game took off & the alt-right embraced Amelia as their meme: trolling potential like that is irresistible to pass up.

That owner is 1 person. This Nazi bar argument does nothing for the multitude of people left behind in an increasingly right-wing bubble because the “morally righteous” are too stuck-up or cowardly to make a stand with rational debate where it’s needed. If Nazi standards & moderation means less policing of hate speech, we don’t get that in the public square, either, yet the public is quite capable denouncing & arguing against it there. Actual Nazis in Nazi regalia have marched & spoken there. Is the public square a Nazi bar? Moderation simply isn’t needed for better voices to prevail. Moreover, there are plenty of anti-Nazis there who stay to defend morality. Much like the rest of the world, there is also much going on there that isn’t Nazi-related. Nazi bar is just a rationalization for cowards to surrender & seek comfort, because when the immoral aren’t silenced, they aren’t willing to seriously challenge immorality where it matters.

PPP national income per capita in USA > 3-fold that in China where China beats USA is personal wealth of the less wealthy as mentioned before economic inequality income: fairly similar & high for both wealth: high for both, though USA higher

Needs text alternative. In terms of average purchasing power for the bottom half of their populations income in USA > 3-fold that in China personal wealth in China > 2-fold that in USA.

Nazi bar I never liked this stupid idea. If anti-Nazis start to hang out at a bar, does it become an anti-Nazi bar? What about both Nazis & anti-Nazis: who wins? It seems you privilege the presence of Nazis in deciding the kind of bar it is with no chance of anyone else showing up to decide the kind of bar they make it with their mere presence. You privilege Nazis. I don’t see anyone applying this logic to the wider web where we have Nazi sites: no one calls the web a Nazi bar. Or the world for that matter. Is your language a Nazi bar since some Nazis speak it? Yet some people can regularly use x.com without ever running into Nazis just like the web or the world. Nazi bar is classic bad company fallacy. The most pernicious effect of this fallacy is it just surrenders entire platforms to Nazis & pretends retreating to ideological bubbles is morally virtuous. By immaturely prioritizing comforting & unchallenging environments of social validation & self-righteousness maintained by silencing opposition over environments of unfettered public discourse that challenge us to develop intellectual depth & skill to actually debate serious disagreements, we erode critical thought, limit self-reflection & growth, and allow radicalization to propagate unchecked by exposure to deradicalizing influences & more intelligent perspectives. We promote backslides into repressive extremism by being cowardly ninnies unwilling to counter words with reason & public opinion. Have some conviction to stand up for your morality where it matters.

The rewards of content moderation people begged for.

Cybersquatting is fun. No one is entitled to a domain name more than anyone else.

Welcome to logic. If you think they’re the same thing, then criticizing the government should make no difference to you. Exasperation & incredulity when your questionable assumptions are questioned isn’t a valid argument. Neither is trust me, bro. No one owes you their uncritical faith. If lack of uncritical faith in your dubious assumptions bewilders you, then you should expect constant bewilderment. What do you fucking mean I’m criticizing government and not capitalism? An economic system can exist under different types of regulatory political systems/governments, and the policies can vary. They’re clearly not the same thing. I already pointed out scholarly fields that study their interaction & address your questions in a more serious way. If want to keep pretending there is no distinction & lack the curiosity to pursue the more serious scholarly work on the topic, then your mind is made up, I think you’re here being intellectual dishonest, and I doubt you’re seeking truth.

Explain how to prevent capital from interbreeding with regulation. I don’t need to. You’re criticizing government & pinning the blame elsewhere. Integrity to identify problems accurately costs nothing & frees us from misleading confusion. Your criticism suggests we should focus on devising political systems less susceptible to corruption & regulatory deficiencies. There are various areas of scholarship & research[^research] that try to seriously answer these questions, but they rarely come up in these dumbass online discussions: those might lead somewhere fruitful. [^research]: such as political economy & public-choice

Government policy.

It was regulated. They captured the regulators. That’s the whole point. That’s a criticism of the political system, not the economic one. Government deficiencies not intrinsic to an economic system fail as criticism of the economic system.

I’m astonished at your effort to break markdown.

What a bunch of trend chasers: many of us were doing that before AI. Posers.

Everyone eventually dies.

Needs text alternative. Images of text break much that text alternatives do not. Losses due to image of text lacking alternative such as link:

• usability
• we can’t quote the text without pointless bullshit like retyping it or OCR
• text search is unavailable
• the system can’t
• reflow text to varied screen sizes
• vary presentation (size, contrast)
• vary modality (audio, braille)
• accessibility
• lacks semantic structure (tags for titles, heading levels, sections, paragraphs, lists, emphasis, code, links, accessibility features, etc)
• some users can’t read this due to lack of alt text
• users can’t adapt the text for dyslexia or vision impairments
• systems can’t read the text to them or send it to braille devices
• web connectivity
• we have to do failure-prone bullshit to find the original source
• we can’t explore wider context of the original message
• authenticity: we don’t know the image hasn’t been tampered
• searchability: the “text” isn’t indexable by search engine in a meaningful way
• fault tolerance: no text fallback if
• image breaks
• image host is geoblocked due to insane regulations. Contrary to age & humble appearance, text is an advanced technology that provides all these capabilities absent from images.

image of longass text

nope

Instagram had recommended 1.4 million potentially inappropriate adults to teenagers in a single day in 2022 What does that even mean? That all still seems like catastrophizing over videos, images, text on a screen that can’t compel action or credible harm. I expect that lawsuit to go nowhere.

assert dominance: look back at them, lick your lips, keep fapping/rubbing

CSM Command Sergeant Major Chopped Strand Mat Customer Service Management Customer Service Manager Chadwell St. Mary College of San Mateo Colorado School of Mines Christian Science Monitor Come See Me Content Switching Module Cyberdyne Systems Model ⁝ Why we dragging the Terminator into this?