Amadan
I will be here longer than you
No bio...
User ID: 297
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
26d ago
Okay, well, if he's elected and he doesn't epically fuck up and we're no worse off than before, I'll be wrong.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
26d ago
That's just TDS with extra steps.
How much can I dislike Trump without it being TDS?
I don't care or expect you to agree with my criticisms of him, but if anyone who thinks he's a con, a huckster, and yes, corrupt enough to become dictator if handed the opportunity has irrational TDS, fine- I can only ask if you have BDS or ODS or CLDS?
I can't convince you to believe the things I believe, I guess, but I think it's your attitude that's wrong with America today, not Trump's.
I've actually believed in America my entire life. Not without cynicism and skepticism, and I'm not going to give you my credentials to prove myself to an Internet rando (and get doxxed), but I've taken an oath more than once and meant it, and much of my disgust over the Discourse today is that I don't think you guys (and by that I mean partisans on the right and left) do.
Win or lose Trump is doing glorious things and awakening a spirit that wants to build America and make it great again.
Dude, I'm sure you really believe that and having read your posts over the last few months, there isn't much else I can say that would be charitable, but I will say that if Trump becomes president I will genuinely wish for him to prove you right and me wrong.
You will never do anything glorious.
Maybe not. And what is your glory? Chanting "MAGA" at doubters?
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
26d ago
Okay, look, I am genuinely sympathetic to your situation. I have close family members who have literally been every bit as depressed, at the "why-do-I-even-bother-to-keep-living?" level, as you are, and I am aware that "Think about how sad your loved ones will be" is neither effective nor appreciated. That said:
Or I could take one acquaintance up on the offer he once made me to buy me a one-way ticket to Los Angeles after my mom dies, so I can attend a Caltech reunion… and then take out as many SoCal leftists with me "on my way out."
Whether meant ironically or not, please do not post things that will get a warrant served on us in the event that you actually follow through.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
26d ago
Well, if he wins, I'd honestly love to say in four years "I was wrong, Trump was great." I am not putting any money on that bet, though.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
26d ago
I have a memory that goes back more than one election cycle.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
27d ago
Well, not sure how to quantify "very slightly better." Yes, I think the entire slate of both parties has been pretty shitty for the past few years, but Trump and Harris are pretty much the nadir, IMO.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
27d ago
I don't have an obligation to be a single-issue voter, nor do I have an obligation to vote for anyone.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
27d ago
Ya know, people like to mock "fashionable Euros" like our relationship with NATO and European trading partners is a fake Gay EuroVision contest, but Europe (and the Commonwealth) is actually still pretty damned important - more important (at least to us) than the rest of the world, I would argue. I do not think Putin actually respects Trump and I think Trump is too susceptible to flattery. Do we think China, and our Japanese and Korean allies, respect Trump more?
Africa and MENA might or might not like Trump more (Harris they will probably see, correctly, as an easy mark for more American largesse). I guess you could say that Iran and the Arabs and North Korea are more afraid of just how crazy Trump might be. It's somewhat of a toss-up but on the international front I think Harris is very marginally better for us. I think world leaders will mostly roll their eyes behind her back but carry on business. Trump throwing a monkey wrench into everything may be a feature and not a bug to his supporters, but I don't think that actually helps us. All his promises about tariffs evening the playing field and "making NATO pay its fair share" are going to be either empty, or disastrous, and "make them believe you are crazy enough to start a war" is not, IMO, actually a good strategy for preventing wars.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
27d ago
Maybe very slightly, but I'd still have been pretty unhappy. It's within the realm of possibility, though unlikely, that DeSantis could convince me to vote for him. Newsom I hold in about as much contempt as I hold Harris.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
27d ago
If I actually believed Trump would or could accomplish any of the things he says he will (from calling up Vlad and "ending the war with one phone call" to deporting all the illegal aliens), I would consider voting for him. Since we saw how well he did as President already, I have no reason to think this is the case. (And no, I don't buy "That's because the Deep State was against him but this time he'll know how to fight them.") I think his followers who expect This Time It Will Be Different are being taken for a ride, like last time.
Uncharitable I'll give you (I said as much) but if you feel I booed Trump very slightly more than I booed Kamala, well, too bad. Sometimes both sides really do suck.
I am not ashamed of this comment, merely disgruntled that I am unable to achieve perfect indifference to outcomes. I would not mod it if it came from someone else. We are obligated to be even handed and civil, not pretend to be objective on all political matters.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
27d ago
To a degree, this is true (I remember the wailing and gnashing of teeth and "America is Dead" from my liberal friends when Bush was reelected in 2004 -- and even then I was a heterodox centrist who got hate for not thinking Bush was Literally Hitler), but I genuinely do think it has become worse in my lifetime, and we're at a local minimum if not a historical one now.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
27d ago
Sure, I hate them too. All of them. I blame your Republicans more for where we are now, but I've got plenty of hate to go around.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
27d ago
I guess I'll just use this thread to say: I fucking hate this election.
I hate my choices. I hate having to choose which shitty option might taste slightly less like shit. I hate choosing from two stupid, bumbling mediocre embarrassments and knowing one of them is going to be the fucking President of the United States of America. "Vote for the lesser of two evils" has been a motto representing resigned acceptance of political reality my entire life (I have the Cthulhu for President t-shirt and everything), but never have I felt it so keenly. They're both bad and repulsive, and I honestly don't know which of them will actually be worse for the country because I expect either of them to be terrible. I have said before I probably won't even vote, for the first time since I turned 18. (At least for president; I'll still probably vote for local/state candidates.)
And it's entirely the fault of both parties for putting us here. The Republicans, for letting MAGA cultists take over the party and drive all serious grown-ups out, and the Democrats, for letting bad faith woke identity politics take over everything. And both of them, for turning us into a gerontocracy that very effectively shuts younger candidates out before they can even sniff a primary.
If you held a gun to my head and forced me to choose, I guess it would be Kamala. But I might take the bullet instead.
I think Trump will be more damaging to the economy, and I think he will epically fuck up what's left of America's standing in the world. I think he will be an embarrassment who fails to accomplish any of the things his followers think he will (just like last time) and what he does accomplish he will fuck up. I think Harris will continue our inflationary money-isn't-real spiral into economic doom, hand out more gobs of cash to whatever identity group is most effective at yelling and screaming, and I think Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping will roll her like a floured chicken breast. She's a midwit mediocrity who should never have come within line of sight of the Presidency, and I cannot believe how quickly I watched people in real time shift vibes to Kamala-enthusiasm, Kamalanation, Kamala is brat (W. T. F????) and pretend they had always been enthusiastic about her. Way back in 2019, when she was being floated as a Democratic candidate and I knew little about her, I admit I was tepidly favorable towards her because she seemed like maybe the least bad of a mediocre lot, but nothing she's done since has impressed, and she seems like Generic Extruded Political Product.
But, you know, Trump. I do not have TDS, I do not think he is Literally Hitler, but I do think he's a con, a huckster, an embarrassing buffoon who I believe actually loves America as much as I believe he goes to church on Sunday and has ever read the Bible in his life. I think he totally would become an absolute dictator if he could manage it, but it would require too much effort and political acumen and cunning, which he does not have. He has a huge personality and charisma, and some people think that translates into him being a skilled politician. He's not. He's got performer's instincts and a gift for graft. This doesn't really make him unique among American presidents, but it makes him uniquely bad in this time and place.
This sucks.
So I will repeat what I said a few weeks ago: my only consolation is going to be breaking out the popcorn and watching the wailing and gnashing of teeth post-election night. If Kamala wins, I will read the Motte and other places for the rage, the futile fist-waving, the impotent Internet tough-guy promises to Res1st and Retrn and start a civil war or some shit. If Trump wins, I will read Twitter for the wailing, the gnashing of teeth, and the hordes of smug, self-righteous fucks driven to existential despair, and I will drink their tears.
This is not nice, it is not charitable, it is not noble. It is petty and mean and beneath me. It is my coping mechanism, because this election sucks.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
27d ago
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
29d ago
I agree that human actors still do a better job, but even commercial TTS is way better than the robotic Kindle voice of a few years ago, and lots of people were happy to use that. They've got commercial software now for choosing voices and adding tone, emphasis, etc. wtih markup.
It's not quite human-level yet, but voice actors are right to be scared.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
29d ago
Yes, it's called in-painting, and Stable Diffusion even has a sketch mode that will turn stick figures into paintings.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
29d ago
I have noticed. A lot of hobby spaces have actually banned AI art, and if it's not banned, it's treated with extreme disdain. Any boardgame publisher caught using AI art, for example, gets a social media pile-on. It's a big deal in RPG and self-publishing (where authors and publishers operating on a shoestring obviously find it very tempting to cut costs with AI art). A few traditional publishers have caught flak for using AI art on their covers.
As a bit of an AI enthusiast (I even bought a chunkier GPU for Stable Diffusion), I obviously do not buy the "unethical" argument, but this has become kind of like "Actually, I think racial IQ differences might be real" - not something I can talk about openly with a lot of my circle.
There are a lot of anti-AI arguments, and the ethical/copyright issues are ambiguous, but the bottom line is that artists are, rightfully, afraid of being replaced by a machine. When they complain about how AIs were trained "unethically", ask them if the algorithms improve so much that an AI can be trained entirely on open source or public domain artwork (there have been some efforts to create so-called "ethical" AI models) and produce equivalent results, if they'd be okay with that? They will usually hem and haw and hope that doesn't happen.
I do feel a little bad for artists. I mean, if you had a decent side hustle charging $50 to draw D&D characters, or a more lucrative side hustle drawing furry porn, AI is going to replace you. High end artists will still have jobs, and AI can't really do competent composition or graphic design or a series of pictures with a consistent theme (yet), but the DeviantArt and ArtStation kids are getting hungry and desperate.
It ultimately boils down to money, and they are trying to make it a moral crusade to preserve their livelihood. It is only the threat of being dragged on social media that's preventing more publishers and companies from using AI art, and as AI art gets better and less easily detectable, and more widely accepted, that will change.
I will say that a lot of AI art is just lazy. Like, if you just give a prompt, run 50 iterations, take the best one, and slap it on your cover, it's still probably not going to look very good and it will look like obvious AI generation. Even for my hobby art I do some photoshopping and have learned enough composition to blend elements together - it might still be detectable, but it doesn't just scream "AI." (Then again, I'm not generating anime waifus or furry porn, which is like 90% of AI art as far as I can tell.)
This is coming to other industries as well. Audiobooks, for example, are now pretty lucrative for most authors, and AI voices are becoming nearly as good as human voice actors - and human voice actors are expensive. For self-published authors, it's a no-brainer economically, so narrators and readers are doing their best to make it morally unacceptable to use AI. If the disapprobation fails to kill sales, that entire niche is going to be dead.
It will be some time before AI can replace a lot of other industries, but low-end software development, customer service, and other industries are already being affected. This is what the artists are fighting - not subjective esoteric notions of whether AI art has "soul" or qualifies as "good art."
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
30d ago
I don't hate the federal government as much as most people here do, and I think we could live without the DoE. To the degree they do anything useful, it's what your sister described: managing funds, financial aid, etc. That doesn't require an entire department of the government.
GS 13-14 isn't particularly "high level," btw. It's relatively late career (lots of people retire as a 13 or 14), but it's not someone with significant decision-makiing or policy-shaping authority. That starts at 15 and the real high level people are those who make it to the Senior Executive Services.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
30d ago
"Directionally correct" is fine. "Expressed in an unfavorable" (meaning uncharitable and inflammatory and weakmanned) way is not. Just saying "Progressives believe all crime is caused by poverty and oppression" would be okay. (Though most progressives don't literally believe there would be zero criminals without poverty and oppression.) But the OP said a lot more than that.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
30d ago
I feel like one of us must be WILDLY failing the ideological Turing test, for you to call this a 'zombie idiot' view.
It's you. I know lots of progressives. Exactly zero of them believe that literally no minorities would ever commit crimes if not for oppression, or that crime doesn't exist.
I'm not going to debate progressive criminal theory because I don't subscribe to it, but I'm pretty sure even AOC would not say there would be zero crime if the economy were better. If you cannot steelman their perspective in a way they themselves would agree is what they believe (not "this is what your beliefs lead to" but "this is what you literally believe") then you are weak manning, and the OP was being obnoxious about it and has a long history of being obnoxious.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
30d ago
Everyone loves a nice hot dump on progressives. It's practically the easy-mode for scoring upvotes.
You still need to actually be making an argument or saying something factual and defensible. This post is just pure boo-lighting with a bunch of uncharitable straw men. Do you think any progressive would agree with your characterization of what they believe and what their real motives are? It's one thing to argue that "This is the end result of their policies," it's another to argue "Actually, progressives are all zombie idiots with a worldview that says crime doesn't exist and minorities only ever do bad things because they are oppressed."
If this was a one-off, I'd chide you for weakmanning and ask you to put more effort into your inveighing against progressives in the future. But this isn't a one-off. You have a long, bad history of this sort of post, and being told to stop it.
You actually have a couple of notes to the effect of "last warning, permaban next time." Somehow you skated in the past, and then you went and earned a couple of AAQCs.
You seem to be able to post interesting things when you aren't choking on bile about your outgroup. We would like you to focus on your strengths. By that I do not mean "entertaining rants about how your outgroup is pure stupid evil."
Banned for 2 weeks, and next time will be a permaban.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
1mo ago
Her climbing through the patronage of Willie Brown is well known. The rest may be hearsay, but she was certainly part of the celebrity/politician axis in California.
Amadan
I will be here longer than you
1mo ago
I'm surprised no one has commented on the racial angle. The target audience is specifically black women, who are being urged to pressure black men to vote (for Harris, obviously).
Harris is having trouble getting support from black men - she will obviously still get the majority of their votes, but her polling is relatively low for that demographic. A lot of black men seem to be actively turned off by her. Not being a black man, I can only speculate, but I suspect a lot of black men, even liberal ones, find the combination of resembling their wine mom auntie who tells them to pull their pants up, being a woman whose career seems to have mostly advanced by blowing the right men, and being a former prosecutor, is making her a hard sell when her campaign naturally assumed that black men would prefer a black woman to Donald Trump. (There is also the fact that her "blackness" has a bit of an asterisk.)
I remain actually shocked at the tone-deafness of the Harris campaign ads, though. Do they not have any heterosexual men on staff?
Even aside from the laughable cringe of "full-throated endorsement" from guys who "eat carburetors" and... give bear hugs, and fat black women turning down a 6-figure, 3-6s black Chad (as if), it just screams weakness. "Vote for her! No, really, vote for her! Vote for her.... please? VOTE FOR HER GODDAMIT!"
Obviously the president is not the nation, but I think the regard with which other world leaders hold the POTUS reflects the regard they hold America (and specifically, America's likelihood to take action in its best interests). I'm not sure what your grievance here is; you share the silly belief that I'm concerned whether State Department officials will be welcomed at European wine and cheese parties, or you think I dramatically underestimate how well Trump can play other world leaders and not be played by them? (I have already said I think Harris will absolutely be played by them.)
I think very few people here have opinions worth valuing. I didn't ask you to value mine. (I do value yours on global politics and strategy, fwiw.) I confess I am not sure what exactly you think I am wrong about, other than apparently not having a high enough opinion of Trump, and overestimating Europe's importance? I am willing to be persuaded on the latter point (and maybe on the former, but you haven't really tried).
More options
Context Copy link