Which, of course, they would desist from in a society that had no freedom of expression?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
US Politics Thread
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
Good leadership seems rare in governments. I wonder why that is. Currently, I can name Carney in Canada as a good leader in a Democratic state, but I’m struggling to name others. French president, maybe. Britain has had very poor leaders generally since 1945. Anyone got ideas why this is so or am I too pessimistic?Putin, Trump, xi, modi, that's a lot of fucking people living under atrocious leadership.
BlueMoonAcrossThePond
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 27 Oct 2020
- Messages
- 7,600
- Team supported
- Manchester City
I completely agree with every point you've made. How is a truth body appointed? How is it going to be trusted? What are its powers? And on and on... and yet... I think we must, must, must try to establish such body... or else, you and I and everyone else will be basing our decisions on information that may or may not be true.You are calling for the press to be repressed simply by proposing a ‘truth body’. I asked who decided the truth and you have completely missed the point of your truth body: who appoints it? Who are the members? How do they decide what the truth is? That’s why I asked if you knew any history because in every country that has limited freedom of expression, the answer to these questions has always been ‘the government’. Who do you think decides the truth today in Russia or China? These govs do not need AI to pump out lies which many of their population believe. The only bulwark against government lies is freedom of expression; yes, with all its faults and risks.
Ironically, under your regime you would not be allowed to make these posts as they would challenge government hegemony.
>> Ironically, under your regime you would not be allowed to make these posts as they would challenge government hegemony.
You either misunderstand or purposely misstate my intent, on several levels. I'm not calling for suppression of posts - rather I'm calling for some sort of body charged to rate the factual accuracy of posts.
By-in-large, I'm OK with any post whatsoever - except that I'd outlaw AI-generated posts. Opinions, factual or not are OK - and you're free to post them. But there ought to be some trusted body to rate such posts - and perhaps such a body will emerge organically, without government involvement... I honestly don't know in this regard.
Last edited:
There are already several commentaries that do the rating you propose. Who takes any notice of them? Do you know who they are? I guess from your proposal that you don’t use them.I completely agree with every point you've made. How is a truth body appointed? How is it going to be trusted? What are its powers? And on and on... and yet... I think we must, must, must try to establish such body... or else, you and I and everyone else will be basing our decisions on information that may or may not be true.
>> Ironically, under your regime you would not be allowed to make these posts as they would challenge government hegemony.
You either misunderstand or purposely misstate my intent, on several levels. I'm not calling for suppression of posts - rather I'm calling for some sort of body charged to rate the factual accuracy of posts.
See PolitiFact, Snopes, AAP Fact Check for example.
Why would your body be superior to these?
Last edited:
BlueMoonAcrossThePond
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 27 Oct 2020
- Messages
- 7,600
- Team supported
- Manchester City
I do know some of them. And I'm on board with your skepticism. Really I am.There are already several commentaries that do the rating you propose. Who takes any notice of them? Do you know who they are?
I think you're missing a key component of my argument though... very shortly, it will be impossible, absent legislation to the contrary, for you, or I, to distinguish truth from fiction - such is the power of AI.
And yes... I argue my point beyond AI... to encompass, somehow, the need to sort truth from fiction. Even absent AI, it's becoming increasingly more and more difficult for me to do so - and I am a critical thinker - on issues such as what is actually going on in Russia's war against Ukraine - who is winning, how stable is Putin's grip on Russia, how willing is Russia to engage in tactical nuclear warfare, and on and on and on... it's fucking almost impossible to sort truth from fiction in this regard. And it's only getting worse and worse.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
Zelensky is an exceptional leader.Good leadership seems rare in governments. I wonder why that is. Currently, I can name Carney in Canada as a good leader in a Democratic state, but I’m struggling to name others. French president, maybe. Britain has had very poor leaders generally since 1945. Anyone got ideas why this is so or am I too pessimistic?
Anyone with half a mind knows that from time immemorial the strong have attacked the weak. The rich have extracted wealth from the poor.
Trump doesn't care about the American working class so the idea he wants to improve the lot of Venezuelans is absurd.
The world is in deep shit and I have very little hope that things will improve.
4 large countries are run by dictators and Europe which has at least some democratic values is incapable of facing down these people.
China has unlike the US and Russia avoided attacking anyone for a long time preferring a more subtle economic approach, something that seems to be beyond the US.
Trump doesn't care about the American working class so the idea he wants to improve the lot of Venezuelans is absurd.
The world is in deep shit and I have very little hope that things will improve.
4 large countries are run by dictators and Europe which has at least some democratic values is incapable of facing down these people.
China has unlike the US and Russia avoided attacking anyone for a long time preferring a more subtle economic approach, something that seems to be beyond the US.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
I’m not sure what you mean by a ‘long time’, because China, unlike the US and especially Russia, has no real history of militarily attacking and invading other sovereign nations. It’s simply not been in their culture.China has unlike the US and Russia avoided attacking anyone for a long time preferring a more subtle economic approach, something that seems to be beyond the US.
For me, as things stand, they are definitely the lesser of the three evils, because they are at least rational, and crucially, aren’t Russia, who are cunts.
Totally agree with you. I should have said a very long time. But I just checked and China invaded the people's republic of Vietnam in 1979 apparently due to the latter's actions in Cambodia.I’m not sure what you mean by a ‘long time’, because China, unlike the US and especially Russia, has no real history of militarily attacking and invading other sovereign nations. It’s simply not been in their culture.
For me, as things stand, they are definitely the lesser of the three evils, because they are at least rational, and crucially, aren’t Russia, who are cunts.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
The exception that proves the rule!Totally agree with you. I should have said a very long time. But I just checked and China invaded the people's republic of Vietnam in 1979 apparently due to the latter's actions in Cambodia.
Why would the current fact checkers be nullified by AI? There are ways of detecting it and there are always alternative sources.I do know some of them. And I'm on board with your skepticism. Really I am.
I think you're missing a key component of my argument though... very shortly, it will be impossible, absent legislation to the contrary, for you, or I, to distinguish truth from fiction - such is the power of AI.
And yes... I argue my point beyond AI... to encompass, somehow, the need to sort truth from fiction. Even absent AI, it's becoming increasingly more and more difficult for me to do so - and I am a critical thinker - on issues such as what is actually going on in Russia's war against Ukraine - who is winning, how stable is Putin's grip on Russia, how willing is Russia to engage in tactical nuclear warfare, and on and on and on... it's fucking almost impossible to sort truth from fiction in this regard. And it's only getting worse and worse.
While AI of course has its dangers, it doesn’t render the rest of us stupid or undiscerning. I think you overstate the case: a) assuming AI has the field to itself and that there is no rebuttal: b) assuming the bad actors will always prevail, outnumbering good actors.
It's not gaslighting.The United States, under the so-called peace president, is now engaged in military operations against Nigeria and Venezuela. And is likely to engage against Iran.
Meanwhile, the United States has threatened Canada and Denmark - for their refusal to join the USA.
FFS! How long can this gaslighting last?
Gaslighting is when you're being unknowingly manipulated.
This is open theft and corruption.
They wouldn't do it if they didn't think some people are stupid enough to give it credence.Presumably you think people are too stupid to notice. Have a look at Trump’s opinion poll figures concerning honesty.
So it's alright to do it then. Why minimise the lie? You're approving gaslighted.Some people maybe but not so many as to change the course of politics, which is the contention.