I had predicted this a while back, in that enabling Trump meant victory for the GOP, but the total erosion of Conservative values. This is clear in that any career politician will likely cede power to a bunch of nutjobs or meme lords with money.

They can either shut up and let Trump do his thing (lol), or they can dig their heels in and fight his decisions from within, grinding government to a halt (also lol). Either way, it’s a win for most, because in the long term the right will bail after Trump and leave a party so weak that it probably won’t be able to fight off the memory of Trump. He’ll never endorse a candidate that’s not himself, especially if the GOP blocks him. His rabid fan base will either die out, or go third-party because the GOP is “too woke” or something.

As someone that works in AI, most of what Lemmy writes about LLM’s is hilariously wrong. This, however, is very right, and what amazes me is that every big tech company had made this realisation - yet doesn’t give a fuck. Pre-LLM’s, we knew that manual patching and intervention wasn’t a scalable solution, and we knew that LLM’s were prone to hallucinations, but ChatGPT showed companies that people often don’t care if the answer is wrong. Fuck it, let’s just patch this shit as we go…

But when this shit happens, oh boy, do I feel for the poor engineers and scientists on-call that need to fix this shit regularly…

Because none of those points matter to the average user.

I don’t see him lasting his full term. Dude’s old, is incredibly unhealthy, and has enough power-mad people around him that the first sign of weakness will probably be enough for medical intervention and Vance becoming president. Becoming president AGAIN at his age is possibly the dumbest thing he can do for his health.

I’m not gay, but the idea of outing ANYONE in the LGBTQIA+ community has long been a cardinal sin, enough so that it destroys careers and forces them to be almost globally shunned. I would imagine that for many there is a deep-set conflict between outing someone that has wronged them, and not outing someone that would likely want to be accepted elsewhere where they don’t need to pretend to be something they aren’t.

You cannot compare newly-formed countries with those that have CENTURIES of history behind them, and their own geopolitical goals over that time. The point still stands that no one outside of the US cares about their constitution or political system, and to say it does shows an incredible level of ignorance of world politics outside of US borders. Even countries like Australia with their own constitution maintain theirs to be as invisible to society as possible, and amend when needed without fuss.

Populism won’t disappear, ever. What I firmly dispute is that US politics has any stronghold over the rest of the world in terms of populism. Ultimately, populism is a world problem, and was a problem well before Trump even decided to have a go at politics. Brexit largely predicted that Trump would find power before others did, and populism largely found its way into the UK back in 2008 with Cameron. In France, you could argue the NF paved the way decades ago. The point is that Trump and the US did not dictate this - if anything they’re late to the party and hold zero influence in immigration based populism.

I think a lot of your comment boils down to a few things that Americans need to accept:

• Americans don’t care about policy. They like sound bites, and Trump gives those for days.
• People vote against their interests in the name for change, even if it negatively affects people like them (but importantly, not them)
• America is a deeply racist and misogynistic country.
• Playing it safe doesn’t win elections in America, but minorities only win if the other choice is uninspired.

Where I disagree is that it was a toss-up. Harris has performed worse than Hillary, which is wild considering how deeply unpopular she was. Frankly, before she ran it was obvious how disliked she was.

While I get it, I still find it weird that so many British people, including card-carrying members of Labour and British journalists volunteered to campaign for a foreign politician. It’s a damaging look in hindsight, and is likely why the US-UK relationship will be dead under Trump, as opposed to tight back in 2016.

With that said, he’s not wrong. The US is absolutely not ready for this, and it’ll take decades of education and a rebuilding of the Democrats to claw back from this.

…I have no idea what you’re talking about.

No one outside of the US gives a fuck about the US constitution. Many countries have their own constitution, and many of these countries have a history that goes back many centuries before America was a thing.

Yes, Trump has likely fucked it all up for anyone that isn’t rich or white, but no, this won’t usher in a new era of right-wing politics again. Many countries have either flirted with populism for decades already, or have got over their populist turn from pre-Trump and voted moderates in.

From the perspective of Europe, Trump ripping shit up is likely only going to result in a more united Europe, because they’ll need to pick up the pieces for climate change and NATO. Trump enforcing tariffs on European countries will harm exports while bolstering European trade, and might even go as far as to push countries like the UK that are largely Eurosceptics into aligning with those near their borders. This isn’t 2016, and with more at stake now I can see Trump either toning down his rhetoric, or isolating his country from his closest allies.

Yeah, the person above isn’t being accurate at all.

While here in the UK we rely heavily on the US for control of Trident, the US dropping NATO support would just require additional defence spending and closer alignment with Europe. If Trump is bought by Russia, Putin would see this as a Very Bad Thing, and would want to keep the US in the fold because even with the US NATO would likely steamroll Russia.

The Trump dynamic is somewhat problematic, should it fester elsewhere in Europe. Globalisation was an important trait to maintain for the US, whereas most populist movements move towards buying local or supporting national interests above all else. Europe is largely self-sufficient, even in defence, so Trump would probably cut off huge numbers of imports/exports just to prop up Elon’s shitty cars.

I say this as someone in big tech, AI is pushed because it’s an easy lie to keep big companies viewed as innovating to shareholders. I say this knowing that Google, Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon have contributed significantly to AI research in the last few years alongside the obvious contributions of OpenAI - the goal isn’t groundbreaking AI work, but to act as a smoke-screen to show that nothing else has been delivered.

Google has lost ground in advertising, and is losing customers on many of their services. Amazon is losing ground in cloud computing and in retail. Apple has stagnated with recent poor releases. Microsoft has made ground in cloud, but has struggled in advertising, Xbox, Office, and Windows. They use GenAI to keep their stock price high, otherwise they’d drop like a sack of shit because shareholders would say “what the fuck have you even done in the last half a decade?”

Why strike when you can unionize?

Start building small unions for blue collar roles that focus primarily on employment protection, rather than pushing salaries high. From there, as the cost of living increases, push for a percentage increase that aligns, and strike fully if those demands aren’t met.

If Trump wants to block migration, then forming unions would be the defining legacy of a Trump administration. He can’t go for cheap foreign labour, and he can’t remove domestic…

I work with several Indian people, and sadly this sentiment is very common.

Many of them transferred from India to the US, and some were lucky enough for their employer to sponsor a green card before the tariffs became insane for people from India.

Many of them, including those that cannot vote and those that don’t have green cards, love Trump. They actively want to ensure that people from other countries have no route to the US, despite many of them flipping entirely when something happens that jeopardises their ability to stay. Lately, several were celebrating a Trump win because it meant that the stock prices on their RSU’s would rise. If it means layoffs, they’ll criticise Trump or the Dems for their current leadership.

It’s basically the same as what happens here in the UK. People will either vote for what immediately benefits them only, or they’ll vote for immediate damage for what may be long-term benefits for their beliefs. Very few view the big picture, and many that are directly affected consider themselves to be outliers - the genius that got through.

It’s painful that this is downvoted. If you can’t cite facts, you’re as dumb as Trump supporters, you just happen to be on the other side…

I imagine a lot of it is to remove current stock, and because the UK has several tobacco companies that moved into vapes, and also employ hundreds

Gigs and concerts are pretty grim for this now too.

Argos has a huge amount of stuff, is often as cheap as Amazon, and can handle same-day pickup and delivery. Saying that it doesn’t exist in the UK is definitely bullshit, especially when we are a tiny fucking island that has handled next day delivery at scale for DECADES.

While I do like jokes, even offensive ones, it often surprises me that so many American comedians seem to struggle with:

• Knowing that their audience isn’t just people in the room with them
• Understanding that at a mainstream level you can’t just cater to one crowd.

I’ve always found Tony Hinchcliffe to be a strange comedian. Sometimes he’s funny, and some of the people on Kill Tony can be great (especially the guitar guy from a while ago), but many within the “Rogan Circle” just seem to struggle with going from small shitty bars in Texas a decade or two ago to owning podcasts with thousands of viewers.

Are there hundreds of alternatives to online shopping on Amazon?

The same with logistics. Surely there are MANY delivery companies?

What about Amazon would you miss?

The problem with these fundamental rulings is that they’re largely trying to fit square objects through round holes. When a simple ruling is made to essentially say “to current law, no”, the law itself ultimately becomes meaningless, because older games couldn’t be easier to pirate. Most of them are smaller than a TikTok video, and are so cheap/easy to host that you’ll never stop them from being shared. Hell, emulation has come so far that you can effectively emulate these games on a browser, on multiple devices, even devices that don’t natively support gaming.

The smart thing to do would be to say that maybe the legal framework that embodies retro gaming needs to be researched and heavily considered. It’s a hard task that’ll require many lawyers, many fights, and lots of lobbying to ensure the word of law is worth something. Sadly, it’s easier to say “lol no” and to essentially just promote piracy.