The path to comprehending the complete picture involves engaging in dialogue to grasp the trade-offs considered by each person. This only works if everyone is actually engaging in dialogue, though.
It is crucial to recognize that disagreements generally arise from individuals approaching the problem from different perspectives. I presented my perspective and you went after some straw men. Are there personal insecurities that hinder the expression of contrary opinions here?
Thanks for clarifying that you utterly failed to understand what was being said to you. My point was that the actual problem is with the capitalist system itself. Stuff like Crypto, NFTs, and generative AI is not the root cause of the problems, it’s simply a symptom of an underlying problem. Getting upset over these things is a complete and utter waste of energy, and it’s utterly misguided. Let me know if you’re still having trouble understanding my point and need me to use smaller words to get it across.
The only one struggling with “non sequitur” and “strawman” and “basic connections to underlying language” is you. Since you keep using these terms without evidently understanding them or even understanding the content of what’s being said to you. The irony here of you exhibiting generative model behavior while raging against them is quite hilarious.
None of the points you’ve listed actually address my argument, and it’s pretty clear that you’re either incapable of understanding it or intentionally avoid engaging with it. My blog in no way contradicts my online persona, but I guess that’s something you felt important to throw in as a way of ad hominem in lieu of having any actual point to make.
(original comment) this has nothing to do with Hieronymus Bosch: never countered ergo conceded; whole premise is pointless
(original comment) genAI slop is bad: you say capitalism is bad not genAI, I say tech isn’t there and wasting energy is bad; you’ve yet to prove that capitalism being bad (your core argument) means genAI can actually work or that since capitalism is bad burning energy is okay
burning any energy for the current model is bad: you say capitalism is bad; this addresses nothing
NFTs are bad: we agree
making fun of people that swallow genAI proganda is always correct: you conceded the original point and also dropped when I pointed out that making fun of NFTs made things better
there is a fundamental misunderstanding about how capable the tech is, proganda aside, and a basic review of genAI art slop highlights this: you do not provide any analysis here; general tech consensus is that AI is very far from doing anything useful
your blog contradicts your online persona: you’re trying very hard to be mean here so either you’re writing your blog understanding you’re the asshole in the room that no one disagrees with or you’re incapable of self reflection.
We both agree that capitalism is bad, you provide no evidence aside from ad hominem to contradict the most superficial analysis of your midjourney, and you have swallowed way too much genAI propaganda (coincidentally called out many times and left unanswered) without applying any of your development critical thinking skills. You want to burn energy on dumb shit to support billionaires while saying billionaires are bad, I think that’s stupid and enjoy poking fun at any engineer stupid enough to miss the forest for the trees.
The only one doing a gish gallop here is you. I had a very clear and simple point all along, which is that it’s not productive to perseverate over symptoms of the system. Evidently, you’re incapable of addressing this point and instead proceed to keep making straw man arguments that have nothing to do with anything I said. Apparently you think that if you keep writing walls of text that will somehow distract from the fact that you don’t have any actual counterpoint to the simple statement I made.
Seeing how you clearly need to have the last word here, I’m going to stop here so you can get it out of your system and move on with your life. Bye.
The path to comprehending the complete picture involves engaging in dialogue to grasp the trade-offs considered by each person. This only works if everyone is actually engaging in dialogue, though.
Hence why it’s pointless trying to have an actual discussion with people like you.
It is crucial to recognize that disagreements generally arise from individuals approaching the problem from different perspectives. I presented my perspective and you went after some straw men. Are there personal insecurities that hinder the expression of contrary opinions here?
Thanks for clarifying that you utterly failed to understand what was being said to you. My point was that the actual problem is with the capitalist system itself. Stuff like Crypto, NFTs, and generative AI is not the root cause of the problems, it’s simply a symptom of an underlying problem. Getting upset over these things is a complete and utter waste of energy, and it’s utterly misguided. Let me know if you’re still having trouble understanding my point and need me to use smaller words to get it across.
Oh my goodness simpler words would be nice since we’re struggling with “non sequitur” and “strawman” and “basic connections to underlying language.”
I appreciate your summary! Here’s mine:
The only one struggling with “non sequitur” and “strawman” and “basic connections to underlying language” is you. Since you keep using these terms without evidently understanding them or even understanding the content of what’s being said to you. The irony here of you exhibiting generative model behavior while raging against them is quite hilarious.
None of the points you’ve listed actually address my argument, and it’s pretty clear that you’re either incapable of understanding it or intentionally avoid engaging with it. My blog in no way contradicts my online persona, but I guess that’s something you felt important to throw in as a way of ad hominem in lieu of having any actual point to make.
Cheers.
Since we’ve turned this into a gish gallop
We both agree that capitalism is bad, you provide no evidence aside from ad hominem to contradict the most superficial analysis of your midjourney, and you have swallowed way too much genAI propaganda (coincidentally called out many times and left unanswered) without applying any of your development critical thinking skills. You want to burn energy on dumb shit to support billionaires while saying billionaires are bad, I think that’s stupid and enjoy poking fun at any engineer stupid enough to miss the forest for the trees.
The only one doing a gish gallop here is you. I had a very clear and simple point all along, which is that it’s not productive to perseverate over symptoms of the system. Evidently, you’re incapable of addressing this point and instead proceed to keep making straw man arguments that have nothing to do with anything I said. Apparently you think that if you keep writing walls of text that will somehow distract from the fact that you don’t have any actual counterpoint to the simple statement I made.
Seeing how you clearly need to have the last word here, I’m going to stop here so you can get it out of your system and move on with your life. Bye.
You started with a straw man tho?