So people can just downvote it instead right? That’s literal direct democracy at play - if there’s more people that like the bot they’ll upvote it and it will have a positive score - saying “just bury your head in the sand if you don’t agree with this message” is the reason we’re in this political mess in the first place…

Which is why the bot is not useful - it literally tries to standardize political stances when that’s actually impossible.

Same reason I don’t trust it - imagine rating fking BBC (the literal pro-state violence, austerity supporting, anti-immigration governmental mouth piece as “left-center”)

It just distorts people’s perception of what political biases are and makes them complacent by relying on an automated bot to do the important work of using your own judgment for what constitutes as moral or justified.

By letting it platform itself on lemmy, it’s basically inserting itself as the de facto expert on the topic - so for example, people overseas might see BBC rated as left-center and highly factual and start believing that wanting to “secure your borders” is a thing that UK leftist want. Well excuse me if I don’t want a privately owned (even if open source) US company deciding what political views others should have.

Being grateful is pretty neat but make sure to reciprocate! - “Suck her clit every morning to thank her for choosing you” 🥰

memes aside it does look pretty neat - simple .apk installs, yaml system configs, automatic boot rollback, easy multi-gpu support - all solid user focused features - will have to see how it develops but so far it seems like a better alternative to the likes of PopOS

That’s easy. People who wish others to die. They die first. If they are willing to accept sacrificing others, they die first.

I didn’t agree to die. Or to be killed. Or murdered. Yet I have to be executed all the same, because they don’t care if you die or not.

First to die.

I mean the person who coined the term “genocide” considers the atrocities against the native Americans a genocide…

But sure, call it “ethnical cleansing” if pedantry helps you sleep better at night…

And I’ll still continue using the UN recognized definition of “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group” which by my understanding fits both the American and Palestinian atrocities.

So saying “wipe Gaza off the face of the Earth” followed by almost continuous bombardment isn’t in your eyes evidence of specific intent and action, because they haven’t wiped them out yet? Therefore, by your own definition, the colonizing Europeans never commited genocide against the indigenous American population, because there’s still native Americans left and they have their own nature reserves to reside in?

It’s because the concept of a particle having definite properties like position and momentum doesn’t hold in the quantum world. Until a measurement is made, the particle is in a superposition of all possible states but with different probabilities, these are described by its wavefunction, which encodes what the various particle variables (position, spin, momentum, etc.) could be.

So, it’s not a measurement issue that introduces the uncertainty; it’s already there as a fundamental property of the particle’s quantum state.

Measurements merely “choose” one of the many possible outcomes, collapsing the wavefunction and in turn making exact measurement of other complementary properties impossible (because the mere act of measuring one variable causes the system to transition into a new state with its own set of probabilities and uncertainties for all variables)

And because these are inherent limitations dictated by quantum mechanics and the uncertainty principle, even if we could know the current state of every particle in the universe, we still couldn’t accurately predict the future because of that fundamental uncertainty.