Folks from rural areas prioritize cultural signaling for conservativism over economic growth. I’d hazard that Mr. Zink would probably vote Trump again, given the opportunity, if the opposite candidate publicly supported trans rights or was just a Democratic black woman.
Edit:
Goosechase.jpg “You won’t meet anyone more conservative than me, and I didn’t vote for this”
“WHAT DID YOU VOTE FOR THEN”
Not to be a downer if you’re anti-AI, but you should know a functional, small, 1B parameter model only needs ~85GB of data if the training data set is high quality (the four-year old chinchilla paper set out the 20 to 1 optimization rule for ai training, so it may require even less today).
That’s basically nothing. If a language has over ~130,000 books or an equivalent amount of writing (1,500 books is about a gig in plain ascii), a functional text-based ai model could be built that uses it.
My understanding is there are next to zero languages in existence today that do not have this amount of quality text. Certainly, spoken languages that have no written word are not accessible like this, but most endangered languages with few speakers that have a historical written word could in theory have ai models built that effectively communicate in those languages.
To give you an idea of what this means for less-written languages and a website revolving around them, look at worldcat (which does NOT have anywhere near most of the written text available entirely online for each language listed, it’s JUST a resource for libraries): https://www.oclc.org/en/worldcat/inside-worldcat.html
But this gets even harder for a theoretical website used to avoid an LLM that can read it, because this is all assuming creating an ai model for language from scratch. That is not necessary today because of transfer learning.
Major LLM models with over 100 diverse major languages can be fined-tuned on an insignificant amount of data (even 1GB could work in theory) and produce results like those of a 1B parameter model trained solely on one language. This is because the multi-lingual models developed cross-cultural vector-based understandings of Grammer.
In truth, the only remaining major barriers for any language not understood by fine-tuning an ai model today are both (1) digitization and (2) character recognition. Digitization will vanish as an issue for basically every written language that has a unique script within the next ten years. Character recognition (and more specifically, the economic viability of building the character recognition) will be the only remaining issue.
Ironically, in creating such a website, you will be creating more data for a future potential ai model to use in training. Especially if whatever you write makes the language of greater economic importance.
Iirc:
The same officer who killed Renee Good stuck his hand in the window of a car driven by a convicted sex offender earlier this year, and refused to let go when the sex offender started driving away, attempting all sorts of nonlethal force like a taser, until the sex offender crashed.
There is some dispute over whether the officer was truly “stuck” or just held on in order to have greater charges against the convicted sex offender. What is indisputable, is that the officer never attempted to use his gun in that moment, while he did use it on Renee Good.
Such bullshit
True, feel free to edit the meme before resharing!
Woof woof
Yessir 🫡
Although, eh, it’s a meme. Any word used would be reductive. 🤷♂️
It makes her more relatable imo 🤷♂️
Oh noooooooo I’ll make the switch in the future 🫡🫡
I love that you’re providing genuine answers to questions in this thread, it’s always needed because the questions are often genuine, but coming from a place of very well-justified anguish or anger.
Something something “the ambiguity of language, curses” 😭
It’s all good my friend
It’s a shower thought, ain’t that deep.
Yeah that’s a very fair analysis.
Also, being a selfish prick is nothing to be proud of.
Tell me you didn’t read past the title without telling me 😭😭😭
Tell me you didn’t read past the title without telling me 😭😭😭
You don’t have to support Maduro (I sure as fuck don’t) to know that the Trump administration is definitely in the wrong to play world police, invade Venezuela, and kidnap a foreign leader. Originally they claimed operations in Venezuela were in defense of democracy, and now some vague accusation about drugs are supposed to explain why all of this is necessary. Both excuses are complete bullshit, but it’s especially hypocritical (although not surprising in the least) for Trump to threaten to cancel U.S. midterms days after kidnapping Maduro and pretending to be protecting the U.S. or some kind of global defender of free speech and the democratic process.
Yeah most of that is right I think. I’d caveat that the attack was more about the naked imperialism in Trump’s publicly articulated “Donroe Doctrine” than drugs or oil specifically.
I don’t really think the Chevron stuff Trump did is odd. Chevron has a longer history operating in Venezuela than any of the other companies. Bad, certainly. I have no love for Trump or Chevron. but not odd.
I kinda miss Chevron deference. As an aside, it is ironic that the namesake for a legal theory providing more administrative authority to the federal government was a private oil company, instead of, like, “administrative deference.”
I take any political win by anyone in our system as a both/and story - both the politician(s) have the skills to meet the moment for public appeal and private industries have preference(s).
Obviously winning without money is ridiculous, but it’s also clear from the historical record that money is not all that’s needed to win; iirc Trump and co spent less than Clinton and co in 2016 & Biden and co spent less than Trump and co in 2020.
I do not really subscribe to the “it’s all about the oil industry” theory, mostly because of the Trump admin announcing a renewal of the Monroe doctrine. Like, oil is part of it because it is a resource, but determination to do imperialism in south america and north America to the point of announcement outright (the “donroe doctrine”) does not solely on oil depend.
I wrote this in a different thread, but there’s something vaguely slimy about framing Chevron as the first beneficiary of Trump’s actions when it has been operating for profit in Venezuela for decades with the agreement of Venezuelas government under Maduro. Neither of them are really pro-Palestine if the line being drawn is anti-Chevron.
Obviously Palestinians deserve way better than the hand dealt to them, no question there.
Edit; and to spell out why this felt kinda slimy to me at first: if:
(1) Chevron was operating in Venezuela with Maduro in charge for years without any real issue with Maduro,
(2) Chevron supports Israel, and
(3) the fight is against those enabling Chevron,
it follows that fighting for Maduro is not directly fighting for Palestine.
Fighting for Maduro would qualify as fighting US imperialism for sure, and therein lies that pesky question about the utility of fighting for someone who had every opportunity to shutdown the imperialist problem (Chevron) on his own by virtue of his political power, and did not.
I fall on the side that it’s fine after thinking it through, but I’m also someone who thinks Democrats are broadly good even if they mostly make for small victories for left-liberal ideologies. Ymmv.
There’s something vaguely slimy about framing Chevron as the first beneficiary of Trump’s actions when it has been operating for profit in Venezuela for decades with the agreement of Venezuelas government under Maduro. Neither of them are really pro-Palestine if the line being drawn is anti-Chevron.
Obviously Palestinians deserve way better than the hand dealt to them, no question there.
Edit; and to spell out why this felt kinda slimy to me at first: if:
(1) Chevron was operating in Venezuela with Maduro in charge for years without any real issue with Maduro,
(2) Chevron supports Israel, and
(3) the fight is against those enabling Chevron,
it follows that fighting for Maduro is not directly fighting for Palestine.
Fighting for Maduro would qualify as fighting US imperialism for sure, and therein lies that pesky question about the utility of fighting for someone who had every opportunity to shutdown the imperialist problem (Chevron) on his own by virtue of his political power, and did not.
I fall on the side that it’s fine after thinking it through, but I’m also someone who thinks Democrats are broadly good even if they mostly make for small victories for left-liberal ideologies. Ymmv.
Digging into the survey a lil bit, I’d be very skeptical of the results.
The question: “How big of a problem do you think the following are among members of the Democratic Party?” is ambiguous.
I read this language to possibly mean ( a ) “which issues do you think are the largest in the minds of democrats,” or ( b ) “which issues that democrats prioritize are bad,” or even ( c ) “how big of a problem are members of the democratic party when it comes to [thing from list]”