They said that in 2016 too after rigging things against populist grassroots candidates in favour of establishment Democrats and learned nothing.

The hilarious thing to me is that without realizing this guy just wrote an on point summary of The Handmaid's Tale and the harmful effects of patriarchy in a single Tweet, but not because he explained it well.

I think going from the relatively peaceful period of the 90s in the west to living through the Bush administration, 9/11, racist fear mongering and alarmism over terrorism, mass erosion of rights and privacy, jingoism and wars in the Middle East under false pretenses, the Bush adminstration's connections with the military-industrial complex getting exposed, seeing stuff like Fox News, Glenn Beck, and Bill O'Reilly start to mindrot the boomer generation into unrecognizable husks of their former selves, the 2008 market crash due the effects of all the failed conservative economic policies and deregulation that occured the past few decades — coloured Gen Xers' and Millennials' perspectives in a way that I imagine would be difficult for Gen Z to grasp.

They have no point of reference to see how badly things changed under the Republican party because they already grew up in the shit, and due to Republican obstructionism they may think that it's Democrats faults because Obama and Biden were in the White House, but much of the fixing actually needs to happen in the house. But even that may not be enough because of the partisan Supreme Court.

And honestly, in a case of a lot of cis Gen Z boys who've been sucked into some shoddy conservative ideas, I feel like we failed them if guys like Andrew Tate, Trump, and other such garbage heaps of human beings were the ones getting through to them.

Not without nepotism you don't

When I try to think of things that would sell out quickly, clown shoes were not on my list but here we are.

I've heard it the exact opposite. Freedom to is positive freedom which tends to be a more social leftist or social liberal trait. Negative freedom (freedom from) is typically a more modern right wing or libertarian trait. But also you could have libertarian leftists or anarchists that lean more towards negative liberty, as well as fiscal conservatives that lean more towards positive liberty on social issues, so it's not fully a left/right thing.

Basically the difference is enabling people via common social framework that gives people options and social mobility vs complete non-interference by government or any other entity even if it limits options and social mobility for anyone but yourself due to their life circumstances.

Here's a quote from the Wikipedia article on positive liberty that backs up this interpretation of the to/from distinction. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_liberty):

"Erich Fromm sees the distinction between the two types of freedom emerging alongside humanity's evolution away from the instinctual activity that characterizes lower animal forms. This aspect of freedom, he argues, "is here used not in its positive sense of freedom to but in its negative sense of 'freedom from', namely freedom from instinctual determination of his actions."

I don't know that I agree with that premise but it's an example of the to/from dichotomy being used in relation to positive/negative freedom just so you know I'm not making anything up.

Yeah, and a Matrix instance

I think I heard about it actually, it's the issue where people make up shit on the spot online to confirm their biases

That's one of the reasons wrestling fans prefer the term scripted or staged as opposed to fake. It still requires tons of athleticism, and lots of wrestlers are still taking very real hits and injuries despite trying to minimize the impacts of them.

It's simultaneously possible to realize that something is useful while also recognizing the damage that its trend is causing from a sustainability standpoint, and that neither realization particularly demonstrates a lack of understanding about AI.

Surely there has to be a cost to the infrastructure of publishing and curation though. And possibly all the work of setting up and organizing the peer review process. So they probably charge the institutions or authors submitting the paper instead of their readers. But perhaps we should treat scientific journals as a public good, like libraries, or at least have a publicly funded option. Or have universities and institutions fund it for the public good.

"Return to work". Motherfuckers, they were already employed. CNBC must have a policy on using the words "return to office", huh. Wonder why that is. 🙄 I bet CNBC is one of the companies that had a controversial RTO policy. I utterly resent these attempts at trying to normalize deceptive language for return to office schemes subconsciously, like people that don't want to return to office aren't working somehow and it's somehow their fault it's a problem, and not the fault of an inflexible employer.