Yeah that'd be a very easy 1A case.

> Yeah that'd be a very easy 1A case.

The Trump admin was very creative when it came to Harvard and figured out many different pressure points to push all at once. Don't expect it to be too simple. The guys running this have thought about avoiding the easy dismissal: https://www.ortecfinance.com/en/about-ortec-finance/news-and...

Just look at how the recent flag burning EO was worded in order to get around 1A concerns.

It is painfully obvious that this administration and their party do not care about the Constitution, or even the principles they were willing to die to defend just 2 years ago.

If Trump wants Wikipedia gone he'll just sue them or open an investigation that never needs to ever go before a judge. Then in return for dropping the suit/investigation all they need to do is make sure that a friend of MAGA sits on the board and can make sure that certain edits get approved and others don't.

People who are surprised by this or still assuming that he can't/won't do something because of the law or norms or "but then the Democrats will do X" need to wake the fuck up.

These people are going to do whatever the fuck they want under whatever justification they can cook up, and they don't fear any repercussions because they are not planning to turn over their new-found power to anyone else.

The Trump admin has a lot less leverage over Wikipedia, though.

The Wikimedia Foundation does not depend on US government funding and even if the US somehow made life difficult for donors, they are sitting on a substantial endowment fund that can float them for a long time.

And at some point, if the harassment gets to be too much, Wikimedia can just up and leave. There's no reason that the Wikimedia Foundation needs to be headquartered in San Francisco, it could just as easily be in Oslo or Paris. That's a huge advantage that Harvard didn't have.

The government gives a lot of exceptions to 1A when claiming they are fighting "bias" against certain groups, countries, or items.

Pleas name a website the government has shut down over bias.

They're not trying to shut wikipedia down - they are trying to control it.

Do you actually need to be spoon-fed examples?

You're the one who made the claim. Do you have examples?

With this Supreme Court that has judges using the Constitution as toilet paper? Not so easy to win.

I mean it is a "a pejorative term used to describe negative reactions to U.S. President Donald Trump..." How is having a page for that biased. And this is coming from some who has been described in the past (not anymore) of having TDS.

Wikipedia is not a source of original research or thinking. If prominent and reputable sources spoke about and coined these other terms there would be articles about them, or the article would be more generic.

Wikipedia exists in the context of the real world. All it does is reflect it. Deal with it.

You haven’t informed anyone of any such thing. Wikipedia does not generate original concepts on purpose and you are complaining that an equivalent term exists for other presidents. Right now if Wikipedia was to create pages for those terms, _that_ would actually be bias as those terms aren’t widely used/don’t exist and would only be added to meet some people’s concept of “fairness” where if something bad happens to my side something bad has to happen to yours too

Edit: Also as someone else pointed out the page describes the origin of the term as evolving out of Bush Derangement syndrome being coined in 2003 and even comments on a Thatcher Derangement Syndrome phrase used after her death. The Trump Derangement Syndrome appears to be the main article because of the actual usage by government and in legislation

This is has to be ragebait by a pathetic troll. You haven't even read the first 4 lines of the page you've linked, where it refutes your argument that "this is specific to Trump". At least work a little on your clown material.

Bush Derangement Syndrome is covered (the writeup is linked to from the TDS article) but there is something special when republicans in multiple state legislatures have proposed _legislation_ on the subject of TDS, under that name, which would spend taxpayer money. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_derangement_syndrome#P...

>Where is the Bush Derangement Syndrome? Where is the Biden Derangement Syndrome?

I'd say not everybody was paying attention at the time, but these syndromes defintely exist, it's just that no former President actually did what it takes to reach this level of regard.

All kinds of people agree that Trump can not be matched in a number of ways, conservatves, progressives, independents, whether they are deranged or not.

With any syndrome it does take a lot of consenus but eventually it's foolish to deny.

Every Presdient has it, some are just more prominent and widely recognized than others.

Edit: not my downvote BTW

For an even handed treatment, it should really include discussion of or a link to the propaganda technique of projection / accusation in a mirror, which is how that term came about to begin with. Derangement is a key element of Trump's support, because objectively none of his policies add up to any kind of effective plan, nor do they make sense in the context of American values of individual liberty. It's all just empty spectacle of look over here, you've been wronged, we're going to performatively attack the people who supposedly wronged you. By preemptively lashing out and gaslighting the actually-conservative group as "deranged" for merely reacting to the destruction, they obscure the obvious.

Do bat's know what senses humans have? Or have the concept of what a human is compared to other organisms or moving objects? What is this analogy?

Yeah, I wrote this in a bit too short a hand to meet the critics where they sit...

There's an immense history of humans studying animal intelligence, which has tended pretty uniformly to find that animals are more intelligent than we previously thought at any given point in time. There's a very long history of badly designed experiments which surface 'false negative' results, and are eventually overturned. A common favor in these experiments is that the design assumes that animals have the same prescriptions and/or interests as humans. (For example, trying to do operant conditioning using a color cue with animals who can't perceive the colors. Or tasks that are easy of you happen to have approachable thumbs... That kind of thing.) Experiments eventually come along which better meet the animals where they are, and find true positive results, and our estimation of the intelligence of animals creeps slightly higher.

In other words, humans, in testing intelligence, have a decided bias towards only acknowledging intelligence which is distinctly human, and failing to take into account umwelt.

LLMs have a very different umwelt than we do. If they fail a test which doesn't take that umwelt into account, it doesn't indicate non-intelligence. It is, in fact, very hard to prove non-intelligence, because intelligence is poorly defined. And we have tended consistently to make the definition loftier whenever we're threatened with not being special anymore.

I don't want to be too inflammatory but seeing comments like this are what's poisoning AI to me more than the crappy products themselves. Of course the apology would suggest that, it would be business malpractice not to. However the history of results with these things shows otherwise so why put stock in the apology letter and not what has happened.

Also, sure people want that, but that doesn't mean it's a valid thing to want without putting the work in and once again, the history of these things being used shows that they don't really offer that. They offer the *feeling* of that which is good enough to get people's money, end products be damned. You could say the same thing about herion, tbh: "There are many people who don't wanna feel the crappiness of life, and these dealers are offering it."

> However the history of results with these things shows otherwise

Do you remember Will Smith's first video generated by AI compared to what Sora, Veo3, and Kling are doing now?

Do you remember first generated text by GPT-3 compared to new models? 2 years ago, there was no AI coding due to models' limitations, and now we have substantially better products that Cursor and others cannot cope with the demand.

If you can't see the progress, that's a personal thing; it doesn't mean others are not finding benefit.

Where's the big in-production use of this stuff in business that is making money and selling a product people use?

Cursor, replit, Trae, ChatGPT, Claude … and many others

any of those pullin a profit?

technology doesn't just advance itself

No, but one thing is certain, in large human systems you can only redirect greed, you can't stop it.

This is true. We have a choice...in principle.

But in practice, it's like stopping an arms race.

Which arms race? The nuclear arms race of the Cold War? That one got stopped.

It's hard to say the nuclear arms race is stopped when the US actively bombed a countries nuclear processing plants recently, and the US is also talking about building the Golden dome.

If the incentive is there, the technology will advance. I hear "we need to slow down the progress of technology", but that's misunderstanding _why_ it progresses. I'm assuming the slow down camp really need to look into what's the incentive to slow down.

Personally I don't think it's possible at this stage. The cat's out of the bag (this new class of tools are working) the economic incentive is way too strong.

That didn't answer the question but just repeat the original claim differently. Where are they getting those numbers?

But it knows what you're querying, which depending on what you're doing may also give away a good bit about whats in the DB.

I mean regardless of whether it has value in being used, it's pretty much, by definition, "surveillance tech."

If everything is "surveillance tech" then nothing is.

Certain functions like remote employee clock-in with geolocation (literally the first example company in the article) are perfectly reasonable to record the employee's GPS coordinates, in my opinion. If you're clocking in at the job site, having some record that you were actually at the job site isn't an invasion of privacy.

My location is irrelevant to my employer, in most cases. What do they care if I am at home, at the home of someone else, in a hotel, or camping out in a yurt, so long as I do the work, attend the meetings, and get my job done?

One word: taxes

That has nothing to do with my day-to-day location.

> That has nothing to do with my day-to-day location.

In some US states (and some international jurisdictions, as well) you owe income and possibly other taxes (and your employer may be responsible for withholding and reporting related to those taxes) on income from work done in the jurisdiction even if it is only a single day of work, and even if you are not a tax resident, so, yes, it has something to do with your day-to-day location.

One word: Compliance

i always think about e911 calling for enterprise VoIP software phones. In order to make sure the calls go the right 911 local call center it is required to have the user enter the address they are using the computer at. It's the law and the fines for routing to the 911 center of last resort aren't cheap. And thats just the tip of iceberg if required employer surveillance just to follow the damn law.

https://www.fcc.gov/sites/default/files/voip_and_911_service...

I didn't say it was or was not unreasonable, I said it was surveillance by definition (i.e. based on what the world means).

Eh. Depends on how it's deployed and used, doesn't it? To me, it's like calling a bouncer at a club a private investigator.

No. I said "by definition" which means based on the meaning of the word not the context.

You also hedged with "pretty much".

Not if they only way you know how to code is vibe coding.

So he gets to flaunt the law because he's vindictive? Not a system I wanna live in.

That's why I'm worried. To me it's obvious he was extremely upset with all those court cases against him, and now the courts and the Fed Chair are just straight ignoring him. So is Putin.

Yeah I get personally being worried but it's a weird thing to post online because the implication shared is that it'd be better if he [was allowed to]* just abuse emergency powers.

*edit

What’s the alternative? Roll over and let him do whatever he wants?

You have to force the issue. At the end of the day, congress will either stand by and allow the president to ignore the court, arrest judges, send his flying monkeys to intimidate them… or not.

If the president doesn’t back down, we’ve crossed the rubicon.

We already crossed that rubicon Jan 6th

I was going to say, now is the best tome to double down and escalate. Never back down.