He also died from a bullet to the head and 60 years later a statement as simple as 'black lives matter' was controversial.

Nonviolence was never proposed as a shield for activists against violence. He knew what he was up against.

not so sure he did. Both King and X were “allowed” to speak out as much as they wanted… until each of them, realize the war they were fighting was not the real war. The real war was against the rich. Once Malcolm realized this, and that he was being played, and once MLK realized that non-violence was BS he started to drift more toward Malcolm’s end of things and direct that anger toward class warfare? That’s when they were each killed.

> statement as simple as 'black lives matter' was controversial.

Good faith question here, I’m not American… Why was “all lives matter” controversial?

"All Lives Matter" redirects attention away from the specific thing "Black Lives Matter" was meant to draw attention to, which is that, if you are black specifically your chance of getting killed in an interaction with police is higher. There are other racial issues surfaced by black lives matter, as a slogan, eg, having to do with health care, real estate, etc.

No one things that all lives don't matter, but the statement "black lives matter" is used to highlight specific social problems in the US. It would be like if you cut your finger and asked for a bandaid for your finger, and someone kept saying, "But ALL your fingers are important."

> if you are black specifically your chance of getting killed in an interaction with police is higher.

Again, not an expert. But, are we talking per police interaction, or per capita, or of all police homicides?

Pretty sure when I saw, far more unarmed white people were killed than unarmed black people per year, which per capita makes sense, right? But, isn’t total police interactions more inportant?

Its very hard to get a sense for this. There are a few papers which indicate that on a per interaction basis, black and latino people are a few percent more likely to end up dead than white people, but that, again, doesn't necessarily mean that police are more disposed to escalate with these two groups. "Criminality" might be higher among some groups than others, and so the context of interactions with police might be different, but, on the other hand, criminality is to some degree socially constructed and is also correlated with economic hardship, which is racialized in the US (and most other places).

I'm not really interested in defending some sort of per se percentage of unjust police killings, anyway. I think there is ample enough evidence that racism is still a pretty big issue in the US that the slogan "black lives matter" is at worst harmless and at best communicates something important.

It was a bad faith argument to shut down discourse about summary executions of black men in the streets of the USA. It's been about 10 days since they executed a white soccer mom who had not committed any crime, the people who were harping on about 'All lives matter' are still no where to be found. The whole time it was empty rhetoric, people who care about human life understand that sometimes there's a group in particular being oppressed.

Because it was created as a reaction to the Black Lives Matter movement and was designed to imply that the existing status quo, where the USA acts like black lives don’t matter, isn’t a real problem.

Free markets aren't even an exception. They're an abstract construction that exists to make economic analysis scientific by removing all confounding variables from the equation. I'd be extremely surprised to find one example where the conditions required of a free market truly existed.

If people knew more about economics than just whatever is being parroted as 'economics' in mainstream media they would know that there's a variety of types of markets that happen in the real world and none of them are the abstraction of a free market that allows econ 201 students to compare what happens when you introduce trade between a country that produces 4 apples for 3$ each and a country that produces 5 oranges for 4$ each.

It's not kindness, it's interest. Those rates are about to go up up up.

They detect bots but let a ton of them run free because any character having membership = revenue and an extremely significant chunk of active characters are bots. They nuked them all in 2011 I think and the game was nearly empty.

SirPugger's youtube channel has loads of videos monitoring various bot farms.

You haven't done a lot of gardening if you don't know plants get 'randomly' (there's a biological explanation, but with the massive amounts of variables it feels random) attacked by parasites all the time. Go look at pot growing subreddits, they spend an enormous chunk of their time fighting mites.

Determinism is not strictly anti-randomness (though I can see why one can confuse it to be polar opposites). Rather we do not even have true randomness (at least not proven) and should actually be called pseudorandom. Determinism just means that if you have the same input parameters (considering all parameters have been accounted for), you will get the same result. In other words, you can start with a particular random seed (pseudorandom seed to be precise) and always end up with the same end result and that would be considered deterministic.

> You haven't done a lot of gardening if you don't know plants

I grow "herbs".

> there's a biological explanation

Exactly. There is always an explanation for every phenomena that occurs in this observable, physical World. There is a defined cause and effect. Even if it "feels random". That's not how it is with LLMs. Because in between your deterministic input parameters and the output that is generated, there is a black box: the model itself. You have no access to the billions of parameters within the models which means you are not sure you can always reproduce the output. That black box is what causes non-determinism.

EDIT: just wanted to add - "attacked by parasites all the time", is why I said if you have control over the environment. Controlling environment encompasses dealing with parasites as well. Think of well-controlled environment like a lab.

Do you think LLMs sidestep cause and effect somehow ? There's an explanation there too, we just don't know it, But that's the case for many natural phenomena.

I am not saying LLM sidesteps cause-effect. I am saying it is a black box. So yes "we just don't know it" is basically describing a black box.

Then you sell your labour to a capitalist who owns the model. Most people are already doing something like that.

Try to gas up at night in Saskatchewan without a coop card. Had to pitch my tent next to someone's field and gas up in the morning after being unable to prepay at 3 gas stations. In a similar situation with an EV I would've knocked at doors in the morning and politely asked to charge on one of their outlets. I bet I would've been offered breakfast and made friends while my vehicle slowly charged.

I sold a few billions of runescape gold I acquired through staking during the pandemic. It was worth several thousands of dollars at the time. I declared the income when I filed taxes in Canada, as one would if they're a law abiding citizen.

If I hadn't sold it I wouldn't have made any income and it would make no sense to disclose anything about what's happening in a video game.

How do you feel about the night of long knives (the canadian one obviously) and the failure of lake meech?

I feel that neither justifies 2 generations of separatist blackmail, and the use of holocaust terms for constitution failures between two Quebecois men (Lesvesque and Trudeau) is inappropriate — but completely and utterly unsurprising for the overwrought self-pitying elite of the province. Moreover, it is no surprise that Quebec rejects the constitution but simultaneously uses the Not Withstanding clause to block language and religious rights. It is like the bully in Doraemon — what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine.

That said I do grudgingly admire Lesvesque and felt he was much better than all of his successors. You could tell he had a philosophy of a Quebec that could be an actual nation, not merely a collection of childless people who spoke French and simply emulated France.

There is no Lesvesque in Alberta and that is why Alberta will never be a nation; only a gas station for the US. Still, if the only thing people value is income maybe that's the better outcome.

The FLQ killing two politicians (one being accidental*) is very far removed from the scope of the IRA's terrorism. They were infiltrated to the bone by the RCMP that was trying to get them to escalate to put the war measure act in place and engage in a massive intimidation campaign on the massive peaceful and liberal part of the independence movement, something that is quite reminiscent of what is currently happening in Minneapolis.

*They did kidnap him but didn't intend to kill him, they were dumb revolted teenagers who fucked up.