this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2023
344 points (95.0% liked)

Funny

10786 readers
202 users here now

General rules:

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LuckyJones@lemmy.world 33 points 2 years ago (2 children)
[–] natedog526@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago

I was just on my way mention this 😅

[–] Zorque@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago

Absolute first thing I thought of.

[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 31 points 2 years ago (5 children)

I’m partial to the theory that Kennedy’s head spontaneously exploded, a rare but not unheard-of phenomenon, and the authorities hurried to find and frame some schmuck for shooting him, because the idea that an assassin could kill the President would lead to far less existential terror and mass panic than the idea that the President’s head could spontaneously explode without explanation, as could anybody else’s.

[–] csfirecracker@lemmyf.uk 13 points 2 years ago

My favourite theory. "His head just did that"

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 years ago

Kennedy suddenly dreamed up a basilisk

[–] SuckMyWang@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

That’s a dangerous idea you’re playing with

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)
[–] theodewere@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

some thoughts may be hazardous to your skull integrity

[–] agoseris@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

Cognitohazard on the grassy knoll

[–] _cnt0@feddit.de 14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

"AI" doesn't understand how guns work. There's a dial sight on the bolt ...

[–] Decoy321@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago (2 children)

That's actually a comforting fact, honestly.

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago
 THAT'S BECAUSE WE DON'T NEED GUNS TO KILL HUMANS.

I MEAN THEY DON'T NEED GUNS. 
[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Guns used by AI would be designed to be used by AI. We already have automatic nerf and paintball turrets which to me says even if I haven't seen one, it exists for real guns too. Such a device would be perfect for AI control. Perfect in some strange sense anyway...

[–] SolOrion@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

We already have automatic nerf and paintball turrets which to me says even if I haven’t seen one, it exists for real guns too.

I'd like to introduce you to the US Navy's Phalanx CWIS. It's a fully automated 20mm rotary turret designed to destroy aircraft, missiles, and small boats.

[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm not sure I understand what is going on in that video. Is the line from tracers and it's just firing stupidly fast?

[–] SolOrion@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago

Yeah. The line is tracers. Only every 7th round or something like that is a tracer, though. So for every one you're seeing there's another six you're not seeing. It's very much an 'accuracy by volume' sort of deal.

The thing looks goofy as hell, though.

[–] _cnt0@feddit.de 6 points 2 years ago

And the barrel extension/trunnion has dials too ...

[–] GreenMario@lemm.ee 10 points 2 years ago

Infinite Multiverse Theory states that there are infinite possibilities and infinite outcomes that all exist, or not.

So in this universe JFK assassinated president Lee Harvey Oswald.

[–] VicksVaporBBQrub@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

Is an a.i. derivative image of a political figure considered art or a political figure? I'll poll my fellow mods on the rule 4. Interesting. Because this is the issue in Hollywood. I'll vouch for you, Stamets.

[–] example@reddthat.com 5 points 2 years ago

I don't see "AI" being a relevant factor here, it should be treated the same as if it was drawn, photoshopped or otherwise.

Although I don't know the full intention of the rule as it was originally created, I assume the intention to be avoiding political debate here. One of the easiest ways to accomplish this is by banning political figures, no questions asked, but that also prohibits a bunch of content that is unlikely to result in political debate.

At the same time, we have

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods

so I would consider this an exception on that ground.

[–] kersploosh@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

IMO this post stays. It breaks the letter of the rule but does not break the intent of the rule.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago
[–] Lepsea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If you are wondering who actually shot Kennedy. The shooter is you and me Source

[–] Justas@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

Fuck you, Oliver Stone.

[–] JewGoblin@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

I knew it, I'm finally not alone