I tend to agree and give a ton of leeway to stupid, offensive stuff from years past that people have evolved from. We all said and did stupid stuff that we regret. However, this isn’t offensive, and that’s to highlight that Vance either A. regressed in his values from being normal to being weirdly pro-hyper-traditional gender roles or B. has no true beliefs and is just saying what he says because he thinks it wins him votes.

I’m 100% in favor of me being a dictator for life

This right here. Even as a kid studying history, I never understood why someone would support a dictator. When I was like 9 or 10, we were learning about WW2 or something, and I said, “Wait, Mrs. <History Teacher>, you’re saying people wanted Hitler to be a dictator and voted for him? Why would someone give up the possibility of being leader themselves?!” I couldn’t comprehend how someone wouldn’t want to at least have the possibility of having supreme executive authority.

Like, if it were me in charge, then I’m all for it, but some other person? HELLLLLLLL NO! It could be Gary down the block, and he’s an asshole.

Depends on your skills. Documentation is always useful. If you have language skills, translation of documentation or helping create language packs/translations.

That’s just off the top of my head. I’m sure if I thought about it, I could come up with more.

I noticed that, too, but I just chalk that up to people freezing (fight, flight, freeze).

I think what they’re getting at is that we’re uncertain the extent age will affect his duties. Will his cabinet and other advisors be really “in control,” or will Biden insist on his way forcing others to kowtow. It is certain that the dude is old as hell and if it were he alone, he would be incapable of the job. Since there’s a staff and a ton of advisors, the degree of control they have is, well, uncertain.

The water is already 208 degrees man.

Not wrong.

Honestly, that 180 day window thing is nominal. The execution of all of that will take way longer with all of the litigation that would happen, and it’ll take a couple of years to get it all enacted (slow at first then accelerating as more gets enacted).

Personally, I’d prefer if it were fast. The sudden change would wake people up, and cause way more civil unrest. If it’s slow, we end up as frogs slowly boiling. Fewer people will protest or cause issues if things unfold slowly. It’s the idea of the frog in the boiling water. If the changes are swift, there’s a higher chance of ordinary people taking notice and fighting to reverse them.

Except this is a state case. Unless he also has the Supreme Court Court of Appeals of the State of New York under his control…he’s going to have a rough road ahead I think.

The truly unfortunate part is that this may be the only conviction we get. The documents case is being destroyed by the judge, and SCOTUS is likely going to tank the January 6th case.

EDIT: Caught me! I’m not from New York and didn’t check 😅

The original paper itself, for those who are interested.

Overall, this is really interesting research and a really good “first step.” I will be interested to see if this can be replicated on other models. One thing that really stood out, though, was that certain details are obfuscated because of Sonnet being proprietary. Hopefully follow-on work is done on one of the open source models to confirm the method.

One of the notable limitations is quantifying activation’s correlation to text meaning, which will make any sort of controls difficult. Sure, you can just massively increase or decrease a weight, and for some things that will be fine, but for real manual fine tuning, that will prove to be a difficulty.

I suspect this method is likely generalizable (maybe with some tweaks?), and I’d really be interested to see how this type of analysis could be done on other neural networks.

I’m in Illinois, and my entire family thought I was nuts for supporting bail reform. My cop brother said that we’d have hordes of criminals on the street causing more crime, and my parents again voiced how they “want to move out of state” (because Indiana is sooooooo much better /s). They never could answer why paying to be set free until court was so central to security because it never made sense to tie pre-trial lock up with ability to pay.

They never bring it up anymore, and for that, I’m grateful.

Hey, don’t be rude. Cave women were far more civilized and intelligent. They don’t deserve being compared to MTG!

My thoughts exactly. Growth is a byproduct of quality. Similarly, if the Fediverse grows too much and quality starts to slip, we should also let it shrink until quality comes back. I think our aim should be quality, and anything else is just a side effect.

Yeah, I agree. It was well-written, and I thought it was good, but saying this was the best SOTU of all time seems a bit far-fetched. Biden straight-up isn’t a great orator, and that’s fine by me. I would rather someone who can do the job than make wonderful speeches.

Now, how Biden dealt with the hecklers was pretty great, I’ll say.

I mean, not all will vote for Trump. I imagine some supporters will not vote, vote third party, or (gasp) vote for Biden. I think the majority will just vote for Trump because of the R next to his name, though.

Then they’ll be the first to complain when they go overseas and people don’t speak English.

If I remember correctly, he didn’t want to nominate her. He wanted Liebermann and didn’t even like Palin that much. She was just sort of forced on him.

I’m a bit more optimistic about the future if Trump loses. To me, the Republicans are in the throes of a cult of personality, and from what I can tell, there is no Trumpism heir apparent. There will be people who try, like DeSantis, but no one has the singular charisma that Trump does.

My prediction is that after 2024, if Trump loses (which is a very big if), 2028 will have a warmed over Trumpist candidate, like DeSantis, who will probably lose. After that, they will have to figure out an actual platform, and around 2030 is when Trumpism will hopefully, finally die.

I think that’s exactly what the Republicans want.

For real, I really don’t understand how Texas isn’t being prosecuted for human trafficking.

As with everything else with these types, it’s “free speech for me, but not for thee.”