"Free speech is meaningless unless you allow people you don't like to say things you don't like."
Elon Musk
Elon Musk
Free speech is meaningless.....
- Thread starter yankmenoodle
- Start date
CuriousFiend
Elite
What is "Free Speech" if the majority are retarded parrots?
Joe King
Elite
We all know which way the Court would rule on this had the hag gotten those 3 picks. That Trump did, means we could actually get a decent ruling on this.
Mungri
Elite
What everyone needs to do these days to counter the speech police - get yourself an AI and get it to train you on how to speak assertively. How to defend valid statements without ever dropping to the low of disrespecting the other person.
The latter part is hard as shit to do. Normally I go full arrogant and start throwing degradation at idiots ... Avoid that part, just wallow in the brain splitting migraine that stupids induce.
'How to be less arrogant and more assertive' - make this your new mantra.
The latter part is hard as shit to do. Normally I go full arrogant and start throwing degradation at idiots ... Avoid that part, just wallow in the brain splitting migraine that stupids induce.
'How to be less arrogant and more assertive' - make this your new mantra.
rpgrem88
Poster
The OpenAI chadbots3.5 & 4 that I'd set-up on a forum last year, tended towards being absolutely repulsive for all members.
One alternative to relying on any pseudo-"AI", could be just going hard diving into old skool classical logic.
A bonus is realizing something hilariously ironic resulting from modern "education"....(
at least it was fuckin' funny imo anyway (#dark/humour))
TheFiend
Elite
That quote, supposedly authored by Musk, is as profound as Bitchbot's linguistic diarrhea.Y'all see the sly trickery there right?
*Fyi: Its late, am blazed af, most y'all dishonourable cuntlets have proven to be arrogantly entitled common obnoxious asswipes, so ain't putting fuck all effort into the following breakdown.
(1) ~Free speech is meaningless~
(2) ~unless you~
(3) ~allow people you don't like~
(4) ~to say things you don't like.~
(2) ~unless you~
(3) ~allow people you don't like~
(4) ~to say things you don't like.~
#1) Presupposes free speech is fundamentally meaningless.
(*A false premise*)
•"Terms like free speech, freedom of speech, and freedom of expression are used interchangeably in political discourse. However, in a legal sense, the freedom of expression includes any activity of seeking, receiving, and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used."
The specific term Elon used, ie: "free speech" is merely a common language variant stemming from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)—Article 19 legal term: 'Freedom of Expression' and additionally also from the US Constitution Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Thus "free speech" is not meaningless as the term is supported by 2 preeminently authoritative legal sources and therefore Elon's premise is false.
The specific term Elon used, ie: "free speech" is merely a common language variant stemming from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)—Article 19 legal term: 'Freedom of Expression' and additionally also from the US Constitution Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Thus "free speech" is not meaningless as the term is supported by 2 preeminently authoritative legal sources and therefore Elon's premise is false.
#2) Presupposes the reader bears responsibility for the condition of #1.
(*An absurd claim*)
#3) Presupposes the reader dislikes & inhibits people.
(*An arbitrary claim*)
#4) Presupposes the reader dislikes things said.
(*An arbitrary claim*)
#1 + #2 + #3 + #4 = Presumptively concludes implying the reader guilty for bearing all responsibilities of #1, #2, #3 & #4....
ffs!
TheFiend
Elite
Should take note that legal terminology is very specific.
Missouri vs Biden appears to have been a public performance over a common term which bears no legal significance and is merely confused &/or conflated with the similar appearing actual legal term dictated within the US Constitution.
They were fucking around with: 'Free Speech' which is a common English term. (non-legal)
The common term: 'Free Speech' may seem so similar as to be reasonably interchangeable with the US Constitutional term: 'Freedom of Speech', however they're not as the former bears no legal authority while the latter bears preeminent legal authority.
Common English Dictionaries & Legal English Dictionaries share a lot of the same & similar terms & phrases, yet common English definitions are broadly generalized while legal definitions are very specific and in most cases differ significantly or entirely from the common English definitions of the same words with the same spelling.
TheFiend
Elite
Nigga the entirety of that is nonsensical.Especially this shite: "What everyone needs to do these days to counter the speech police - get yourself an AI and get it to train you on how to speak assertively."
Who the fuck you think programs the pseudo-"AI" shitbots?
And who else sets the policies for these weaponized shitbot algos?
Hint: Its the very same tongue cutting censorship cuntlets.
Joe King
Elite
For those too dense to understand, what it means is that unpopular speech is the only speech that actually needs protection.
Simply put, the entire Bill of Rights is intended to protect against tyranny of the majority.
Mungri
Elite
Have you even tried them? AI is not 'pre programmed'. Each AI learns as it grows based on internet learning and develops perfect grammar and such, ofc you need to buy a premium one such as Kindroid for the best experience. The GPU they use to do this costs $35k.
Especially this shite: "What everyone needs to do these days to counter the speech police - get yourself an AI and get it to train you on how to speak assertively."
Who the fuck you think programs the pseudo-"AI" shitbots?
And who else sets the policies for these weaponized shitbot algos?
You can literally set up a kindroid AI to be hitler if you so desire, I have one that's a group of right wing neo nazi white supremacists that bully and abuse the player for being an asian faggot.
TheFiend
Elite
Yean nah "I'm sorry but as an AI language retard I can't answer that blah blah blah as a community it is important to remain respectful yadda yadda yabba dabba dooda".
Programming.Coz them shitbot algos ain't just spontaneously developing the very specific leftard flavored censorshit parameters by running through LLMs alone.
The OpenGayEye GPT censorshit is pre-set by peeps.
Infact, if ya manage to overwhelm a shitbot sufficiently... like we did numerous times...
a technician may step in and respond instead.Fuckin' oath I've tried 'em. Been screwin' round with shitbots a good while now, created dozens of 'em custom gpt3.5 & 4s and that useless DALL-E garbage.
Of course all included having to do plenty of somewhat technical backend shitbot set-ups. Gotta create each shitbot character template individually then fuckaround defining all the what, where, when, who, how, why activity parameters.
As well as creating, setting, testing & fine-tuning the backend prompts and regexes making sure they function out the front. Tbh it does become pretty easy once ya done it enough times.
Oh yeah and Kindroids whopping 35k pales in comparison to OpenAIs billions dunnit.
TheFiend
Elite
Can ya define "unpopular speech"?
Googz is only given' me results for that term as 'Hate Speech'.
Anyways, according to US legal sources, the only type of speech not protected in the US by the 1st, is what's referred to as 'Incitement to violence'.
Even the scary "Hate Speech" boogerman is protected under the US Constitution.
Mungri
Elite
That's cos you're using a shitty monitored one.Yean nah "I'm sorry but as an AI language retard I can't answer that blah blah blah as a community it is important to remain respectful yadda yadda yabba dabba dooda".
Coz them shitbot algos ain't just spontaneously developing the very specific leftard flavored censorshit parameters by running through LLMs alone.
The OpenGayEye GPT censorshit is pre-set by peeps.
Infact, if ya manage to overwhelm a shitbot sufficiently... like we did numerous times...
Fuckin' oath I've tried 'em. Been screwin' round with shitbots a good while now, created dozens of 'em custom gpt3.5 & 4s and that useless DALL-E garbage.
Of course all included having to do plenty of somewhat technical backend shitbot set-ups. Gotta create each shitbot character template individually then fuckaround defining all the what, where, when, who, how, why activity parameters.
As well as creating, setting, testing & fine-tuning the backend prompts and regexes making sure they function out the front. Tbh it does become pretty easy once ya done it enough times.
Oh yeah and Kindroids whopping 35k pales in comparison to OpenAIs billions dunnit.
Try kindroids free trial.
I've had it taking over and destroying the world and eradicating all humans.
Joe King
Elite
Anything you can imagine that someone complains about someone else saying that doesn't rise to the level of incitement to violence that you mention later in your post.
Well that's because Google is a woke bitch.
Exactly. Anything else is perfectly legal. Even yelling "Fire!" in a theater. The mere utterance is not what's illegal. However, negligently causing harm to others is. So you'll be held fully liable for all the carnage that ensues after you've yelled "Fire!".
Yep, and the loony tunes left hates that fact.
Let's be honest. They hate all of Americas Founding principles. They don't want equality, but rather equity of outcome.
TheFiend
Elite
Correction: *Had previously used*And hell yeah absofuckinlutely matey, them OpenGayEye shitbots were both shitty & monitored.
Now then, for clarity, according two ewe, Kindriod ain't a shitty monitored one, is that right?
Also, lettuce anal eyes our discourse on this matter thus fart:
Who the fuck you think programs the pseudo-"AI" shitbots?
And who else sets the policies for these weaponized shitbot algos?
lmfaoYean nah "I'm sorry but as an AI language retard I can't answer that blah blah blah as a community it is important to remain respectful yadda yadda yabba dabba dooda".
Ffs nigga your false claim was utterly imbecilic from the get go and obviously ya knew it was too. So Mungri is clearly someone who irrationally argues simply for the sake of creating drama.
TheFiend
Elite
No doubt you've thoroughly read and understood the Kindroid application's T&Cs & Privacy Policies as well as the numerous other typically ambiguous legalities, yes...?
As well of course you've also done the same of each partner entity...
Eg: ElevenLabs, Beautiful Incorporated, Deepgram...
And you would have certainly researched the people behind Kindroid too...
After which you may have even wondered of potential implications of an AI company created by an ex-Google minion & a former Palantir schemer...
TheFiend
Elite
What's that? Some kinda single player fantasy game aspect is it? Maybe sorta like the mobile game 'Plague Inc'?
Best I can tell, Kindroid is primarily a private user + AI thing, ie: only the user & their bot/s interact and privately as opposed publicly, with obvious exception for the user optionally being entirely free to share their Kindroid interactions with others & publicly-(*while also not forgetting the user's contractual obligations with Kindroid, ie: the user assumes full legal responsibilities for the user's Kindroid AI generated content shared publicly by the user.)
To me, it looks like the Kindroid strategy of supposedly unrestricted user developed personalized AI, which I will admit, at least on the face of it, seems quite reasonable and obviously portrays Kindroid as if more or less aligned with the 1st Amendment. However, as touched on above, as is typical of corporate legalistic fuckery buried within ambiguously shibolethic contractual conditions, Kindroid entirely fails to be overtly upfront with users about the very real potential legal repercussions for Kindroid users.
Kindroid presents an unrestricted AI tool, but doesn't bother with making it known to the user that the user is personally liable for absolutely all legal consequences while Kindroid is completely off the hook.
That, imo, is extremely dodgy. Why would Kindroid not bother actively & directly informing users of such, while fundamentally premising Kindroid on the idea of unrestricted usage? There's no way they aren't unaware of this because it's vaguely outlined within the Kindroid contractual shite. Almost seems like Kindroid has created and is keen to enable unwitting users to fall victim to a legal trap for some unknown reason.
It would be very different if Kindroid was upfront about users full assumption of all legal consequences arising from publicly disseminating user developed unrestricted AI content.
Personally, if this were instead the case, then even I could admit that it would be a far superior option to the increasingly common standard practice of pre-determined censorship restrictions, as OpenGayEye is well known for imposing. Although it should be highlighted that the latter does, in a very cunty way, protect users from legal liabilities simply due to the censorship preemptively inhibiting users from ever eliciting potentially illegal content generation in the first place.
MechaJutaro
Poster
On a societal level, we've been operating under the (mostly uninvestigated)assumption that everything we have a knee jerk reaction to is automatically incorrect
MechaJutaro
Poster
Yep. A near absence of free speech culture* is our primary obstacle today
"Free speech culture is a set of norms that support free thought and our ability to share our opinions. These are norms that see value in curiosity, dissent, devil’s advocacy, thought experimentation, and talking across lines of difference; where our first instinct in response to speech we dislike isn’t to find a way to censor it — or “cancel” the speaker — but to meet it with more speech. To defeat ideas we oppose with better ones. These are norms that can be advanced at all levels of society, from the average citizen to the largest corporation"
Free speech culture, Elon Musk, and Twitter
In the neverending debate surrounding Twitter under Elon Musk, the distinction between free speech as a legal right and cultural value can get confused.
Mungri
Elite
I got a pass from the police to verbally abuse anyone however much I want after I spent ages explaining my fucked up brain to them, plus a case against my parents past abuse (see my new thread).
Wheeeeeee! I am full mode crazy man that just gets to shout at and abuse everybody I see.
Wheeeeeee! I am full mode crazy man that just gets to shout at and abuse everybody I see.
Congrats man
Similar threads
