Seems like a great meme for 2024, not really what I’m worried about in 2026 though.

This sounds like fun. How did it go?

It had sporadic good episodes, such as the first episode. But for the most part it was pretty bad. It used a lot of recycled western plots, somehow.

On the left are the 5 classical Chinese elements. On the right are characters made by combining the elements, but they’re mostly gibberish as far as I know.

We understand it’s AI. It was created to appear hypocritical. It would be funny if Trump were gay. Not because gay funny but because Trump being gay would be ironic. How do you not see this…?

how can we know that in this particular instance they do exist? If this were a reliable way to get someone expelled without any evidence, then if I were a bully I’d accuse other people of making deepfakes of me.

I hardly use sms at all

You’d feel like this too if someone from your community happened to be in a photo with Epstein & co. The church may indeed house pedophiles but for me it’s hard to imagine the pope actually knew about Epstein’s rape island when this photo was taken.

I would not update either way based on this meme.

Best and most earnest case for #notallgenai would be locally hosted “open” models.

So if you read a meme like this, read the thread, learn the truth to it, meme is BS, you’re supposed to downvote OP in this instance yeah?

im girl and my personality is three of these

Mkay well let me know when the revolution starts, I’ll come join in. 'til then, I gotta convince people not to be fascist with my words.

Oh no, fanfic fodder for the American politics fandom…

Well this is “ally” in the liberal, within-the-system sense of the word. That’s still what most people would see as an ally.

For me, you can’t use ‘give’ if there was no action on the giver’s behalf, but coerced action counts as action. Same with take – you ‘take’ something only if you’re capable of a ‘take’ action. So if you’re in a coma, you can’t ‘take’ anything offered to you (except in idiomatic phrases where action on the taker isn’t expected, e.g. “to take abuse”).

This is why I seriously believe that OP’s image is controversial more do to a difference in our linguistic understanding of the word “give” than do to a differing understanding of the facts.

Edit: I think what may be happening here is the so-called “non-central” fallacy.

I think this is the source of our disagreement. In my mind, the word “give” has at most a mild connotation of volition.

fully agree

Yes, this is essentially the sense in which I mean “give.” You got it. This is unironically why the OP image is ragebait – “give” is literally what happened. I don’t know of anyone who would deny the suffragettes and their agitation are the reason women were given the right to vote.

Yes, I agree with all of this. It happened very much like the way the straights were convinced.

The sufragette movement pressured the government (men) to give women the right to vote. In what universe is this not an accurate description of what happened?