This legislation will make sure everything gets locked behind an identifying login, lest a bad word might appear, and they get fined.

Good for the platforms and government ofcourse. It’s only us people that lose.

Move along now. The joint corporate government newspeak will save you from evil! For the children!

Funny thing is that, apart from recognising the name, most people forgot what the streisand situation was about.

Show people that the left and center are able to provide

I wonder if they can, with the reversed population pyramid most EU countries experience.

In the early 90s something similar happened in Belgium (1).

What lessened the extremism in the following couple of elections was investment (in infrastructure, healthcare, economic opportunities, etc) outside of the cities as well.

It turned out that for every tax frank gathered, 80 cents were spend on prettifying the larger cities and the major port. People were mostly (rightly?) pissed off that government represented a terrible ROI for the same group of people for decades. They would’ve been better of without a federal government. They saw their lives get worse, whilst at the same time that government applauded themselves for the great things they achieved.

I’m not sure how feasible the same solution is today, as there’s very little investment budget anyways. Most of tax revenue goes to pensions and healthcare of a reversed population pyramid.

those thoughts are prevalent enough to cause this problem.

Can take people out of the soviet, but can’t take soviet out of the people (1).

Sadly it’s a system of thought that isn’t concerned with observable reality. It’s a sentiment I recognise in most (political) extremists: the idea that your problems must be someone else’s fault (the brown, women, billionairs, … pick your poison).

And, as you noticed, banning it will indeed only validate that sentiment.

(I grew up in DDR, luckily left in early 90s. A solution is therapy, as those people are stuck in generational trauma, which is known to lessen or completely void you of empathy. But that doesn’t scale to halve a country).

Can you really not even picture a path where people just are better, without the need for laws or violence?

I know there’s pain so great that expecting people to accept it is delusional.

anarchists can maximize this as a guiding principle culturally with no state

As a fantasy, sure. I can see how some members of past “revolutions” might have thought that that’s what they’re going to do.

But then came reality, and the realisation that you can’t vibe everyone into cooperation. There’s so many different kinds of people with different goals, life stories and traumas.

Then comes the supression. Which they’re doing only for your benefit, so they rationalize.

Yes, the feelings associated with the “let’s all vibe” and “they’re not vibing and everything is crumbling down” are different. But we have to be intellectually honest and realise as a leads to b, they are the same thing.

It should not be against the law to be rude or dress up as Batman. That’s insane. That’s the literal end goal of fascism

It’s the logical conclusion to “don’t do things that negatively affect others”. The utopia for people who take that as an axiom, results in a totalitarian state indeed! Plenty of historical and contemporary examples of that happening.

If you go about your normal day as Batman in suburbia, people will respond with actual fear, because you’re deviating from the culture instead of challenging it

Culture is the guardrails

Those things exist yes. They’re the guidelines.

De guardrails is the law. Even though it’s exceptional to walk as Batman, and people respond scared to it, it should be legal. In the socialist utopia that should be illegal, because it affects others.

I see the confusion. I used that figure of speech to mean “from the moment you wake up, untill you go to sleep”.

I think I did. Let me rephrase mine, maybe my point of view is better illustrated this way:

(A) there’s not much love for dogs because we have a lot of stray dogs that are legit scary and dangerous.

(B) we have a lot of stray dogs that are legit scary and dangerous, because there’s not much love for dogs

How does one discern the causal relationship in these cases?

there’s not much love for dogs because we have a lot of stray dogs that are legit scary and dangerous.

Perhaps you’ve got cause and effect mixed up

Is it something unimaginable, or is it just accepting everyone should be able to live their life how they like if it doesn’t affect others?

I fear their utopia looks different, because every single thing you do affects others. From your first fart, to your last meal of the day, they’ll have an argument why you’re doing it wrong and must change your behaviour for the benefit of the group.

The utopia is you’re reprogrammed to only engage in activities from the allowed behaviours catalogue. If LLMs can be retrained to behave within the guardrails, why not you?

The people who treat LLM chatbot like they’re people have much deeper issues than just ignorance.

I don’t know if it’s an urban myth, but I’ve heard about 20% of LLM inference time and electricity is being spend on “hello” and “thank you” prompts. :)

😱 Open source robots are too dangerous. We need to keep everyone safe. Luckily there’s government approved good behaviour modules, as per the “For the children” act of 2036.

That anyone would even want a non-FTC robot is so dumb. It’s an easy boost to your credit score, and they only report bigotted or otherwise undesirable behaviour. What are you, a fascist?

I have but they weren’t orthodox

They turned religion into bookkeeping lol

What a bunch of weirdos

Covid knew to aim for the necromancer, what a gamer. Ggwp

Seems like the same 2020 high happened in Sweden, UK, Netherlands, … (1). Perhaps covid (and lockdown) related?