• 0 Posts
  • 31 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 21st, 2023

help-circle


  • I think the rules are typically negotiable in advance, especially when it’s down to just 2 contenders.

    Debates have the potential to show more than eloquence or intelligence, they also show soft skills like whether the candidate can control the conversation, control under pressure, how easily they succumb when bullied, and give the audience an opportunity to read their body language, which may develop (or remove) trust.

    Biden famously told Trump in a debate: “would you shut up, man?” And in that moment quite a few Americans were swayed to select him believing he’s not susceptible to getting run over by trump mouth diarrhea attack like so many other politicians are.







  • The article surmises:

    What will happen when voters can’t separate truth from lies? And what are the stakes?

    Regrettably this has been true since the beginning of time about many issues and is not something that legislation can ever hope to change.

    I think we’ve all seen that the abuse of deepfakes is coming at society like a tidal wave. But I don’t think legislating away the technology that makes it possible is even remotely going the right direction. That cat is already out of the bag, so to speak.

    What needs to be be legislated, however, is personal responsibility for creating (with some limitations) or distributing sexual content that is designed to harm. As a society we already believe this when it comes to revenge porn. But I don’t think it’s as simple.

    Creation is not necessarily a crime, but the intent or positioning during distribution may make something that’s innocent become a crime. Perhaps we cover that with libel laws already. If a picture is true and serves the public interest, it probably doesn’t qualify as libel even if it could harm the target. Obviously, an appropriate venue is necessary, because seeing graphic adult content can also be harmful in its own right, which is why we put porn on porn dedicated websites.

    I guess to sum up my ideas… There’s not much we can do to prevent somebody from generating AI pictures depicting AOC - or your high school crush - in some sort of abusive sexualized graphic state. But we can, and should, impose a high penalty for distributing that material as truth. And there should also be a social penalty for distributing that material even if it’s labeled as fake or imaginary from the beginning.







  • Nobody has 467+ million dollars in cash ready for transfer at any given moment, especially for something like this. That would be poor financial planning even for a billionaire. However… It’s not like he didn’t have a heads up that it’s coming, so it seems like he didn’t have his ducks in a row here.

    I’m sure even Elon or Bill would have to make some annoyingly painful decisions to get that amount of cash on short notice.

    It’s telling that he is struggling to borrow against his properties to raise the capital. It suggests that behind the scenes banks are not offering him favorable terms. And even if he were to win on appeal, it will still be quite expensive for him. I’m guessing that in the bank’s internal analysis they project the original judgment will stand and therefore are considering how much they will earn after they foreclose on his buildings and sell them. It’s potentially sizable…

    If the Trump name were removed from the tower the value might actually increase lol.

    On the other hand, unless Trump is delusional (granted, it’s possible), he must also know that winning on appeal is a long shot and therefore this money, once he puts it up, is gone. I guess his efforts to borrow rather than sell to raise capital are his version of YOLO. Because he’s either president and figures out how to stall, or he’s old already in the consequences will be short-lived.