Maybe #Jan6 Grand Jury could start more quickly than FL, w/ "loose Cannon" presiding/delaying?
As the most terrific #accountability & #truth avoider in history continues to paint all the myriad crimes against law & humanity as "perfect" (like him), and any reference to all the 'hoaxes' (COVID, documents, Jan6, etc.), 'election interference'.
National crime "like nobody's seen before" starting to see the light of day - in court! Finally!
So, ok ... just happy some relief from the alternate-universe of cult rule and criminality may - MAY - be showing a way (in numbers) to elicit some #truth & #justice.
Everyone (sane/'woke') is eager for something to start before Drumpf's play that "it's about election interference - by Biden" hits the wall of 'campaign season'.
Sorry, didn't see your (or anyone's) toot other than that one, caught my eye,.
A few indictment stories in today's mix. Just... "Soon please!"
Though the FL swamp may be rich in crimes, there is no place, it seems, where #TrumpVirus has not broken 'more crimes than anybody's ever seen before". So... fantastic to not be stuck with a loose cannon as the first shoe to drop. More..,
Three minor feature frustrations with Mastodon that never get better:
Lack of a choice between chronological and "relevance" when searching. I search my own posts a lot & now I have a year and a half of history it's REAL hard to find stuff if I can't search chronologically.
When replies to a post are shown, you can't "collapse" or sort down sub-replies. If a post explodes such that subthreads spawn the replies become unreadable. It would be nice to be able to say "hide non-direct replies".
When I was a philosophy grad student longtermism hadn't been invented yet. Even now it is, long after I left the field, apparently a fringe area of research. But what I am now reading about it is frankly alarming.
This is an article from a recovered longtermist philosopher. I'll add some quotes and comments below.
@johnwehrle "Potentials" seem to me to have much in common with Aristotle's "future contingents", and amongst various classes of knowledge, assertions as to future states are ... interesting in numerous regards.
For the present we can rely on direct (or indirect) observation. For the past we can rely on records, impressions (as in discernable tracese left by some phenomenon), interpretation, inference, etc.
For the future the ultimate test is "wait and see", which might be feasible when addressing an immediate promise (or threat) ("pick up that chair and I'll straighten the rug" or "get out of my sight or I'll break your face"), or tomorrow's weather forecast, quarterly financial projections, or election polling. It's a somewhat less viable proposition for predictions of life 100 years in the future, climate in 1,000 years, geological events over the next billion years, or the Heat Death of the Universe. Though I suppose if you're sufficiently patient there's some hope of empirical verification.
Mostly, though, we have to rely on similar small-scale events which occur with some frequency, where "small scale" generally means "multiples over the span and stretch of space and time. House fires, vehicle accidents, actuarial mortality data, flood risks, hurricane and earthquake predictions, stellar life-cycles, etc. Even where a specific even has no direct comparison (say, potential extinction of h. sapiens), we can look to similar events (other hominid, great ape, primate, mammalian, or animal extinctions, say) to make some degree of inference.
I want to do some closer reading on just what it is that the Longtermists themselves have to say (and I'll note that the SEP doesn't seem to have an entry, or even mention, of the topic). But I will note that Longtermists seem ... extraordinarily willing to place extreme significance to prospects with little or no evidence whatsoever in any historical or observable record or phenomena.
Which ... gives me pause.
(As I'd noted in my commentary on Torres's critique of the concept, I'm not defending Longtermism. But I'd really like to see a stronger case made as to why it might be questionable.)
(1/4) “A liar will not be believed even when he speaks the truth.” - We all know that. But it's not that simple. The question of #truth, its meaning, and the existence of multiple truths has become a pressing concern due to recent events like a rathetr unique presidency, an unexpected war in Europe, accelerated climate change, and the popularity of a hyped chat bot ...
(3/4) In 2023, Ars Electronica aims to explore the question of #truth and #ownership. The Ars Electronica Festival invites global participants from various fields to discuss these topics, with the goal of engaging the broader public and shaping our collective future. https://ars.electronica.art/who-owns-the-truth/en/
"If anyone can refute me—show me I'm making a mistake or looking at things from the wrong perspective—I'll gladly change. It's the truth I'm after, and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance." —Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, Book VI
In the future, the top 1% will be extra for edited, proofed content printed on paper or captured on physical film. The rest of us will be left to fight over what is true vs. what is AI-generated truthiness.
What from reddit do you hope to never see on lemmy?
i can’t stand megathreads – no one reads these! no one wants their posts banished there!