Machines are still too stupid to handle anything as massive as Youtube.

Part of the point, really.

But, I mean

they're able to set up algorithms that can demonetize a video before it's even fully uploaded

Co-incidently was the point of the sub-narrative of "Hey Kids" an AI trying to make a kids show and failing.

so, if they're able to do that, categorizing a video as potentially troubling shouldn't be too much of a problem, right?

I don't think I'm anywere near ready to trust the machines yet

Just watch in 2 months all cat videos are gonna be slammed for sexual content cause the AI has the IQ of a lobotomite.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2018/04/07/the-critics-must-be-crazy-ready-player-one-doesnt-glorify-toxic-nerd-culture/#a9c78141886c

is....is that what I think it is?

A positive and accurate article related to gaming on a news website....ON FORBES?!!?! I thought it was just a legend.

@everyone

People are joining our official America First's 4chan thread

http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/167509162

"it will just turn into a proxy war guys" https://twitter.com/Charles_Lister/status/983720452412575744
https://twitter.com/Partisangirl/status/983683054815272961?s=19

great, more refoogees

Shill your cupcakes

you know i actually kind of agree with that article from tim's video today. just that i dont agree with the prediction from it. that person writing that article might be the most woke person on the left alive right now if they actually recognize the polarization of the country and the subgroups of people who make up both sides of the conflict. though i disagree that a war is nessicary to deal with this though it is the american way. i think most people would actually prefer a segragation between the ideologically incompatible sides within the nation. the left isint going to win a civil war though, they won the first one because they had the advantage, it was really only a matter of time and their own incompatence mixed with the tanacity of the right at the time lead to it being drawn out far longer than nessicary in asymetrical warfare. the left rose to power during the great depression because they could offer answers to peoples needs to get things done that no one else could. FDR was basicly the american hitler, or lenon, or mussalini (ever think about how many regime changes occured during the great depression?) and trump is kind of the 21st century's FDR as a populerist.

its kinda delussional to think that the us is becoming more left, not many people are saying that and at the same time winners usually dont call for less cooperation with the loser, they usually dont see that being nessicary consitering it makes them look bad

The dems are winning in so far as there has not been that many good candidates for those oppose to the left to really rally behind.

thats pretty much all of politics, theres just no "good" candidates so its a race to avoid rock bottom

I think that people need to become more moderate, and that the blurring of the lines is happening, albeit slowly

there will always be die-hard cast folk who want nothing to do with any ideal held by group X

you can't really get past it; it's one of those `team` style things

most people ARE moderate,
due to social media the extremist level partisans just managed to not be "a single idiot",
And the media reinforces that "theres more than you think" delusion by reporting on it because they know it sells,
and as a result, you have those in power actually believing it, and making changes accordingly

Well, that's the point I made before

You've got the initiated on each side that are loyal to their party, or their ideals, and then you've got the uninitiated majority that go the path of least resistance

The left is winning the culture war by making right-leaning ideas unacceptable.

For instance, you can see this in places like John Oliver, where people are outraged that 'Crisis Pregnancy Centers' are trying to 'trick' people into not having abortions.

well, its because the left has the "moral highground"

People want to "be good"

and the majority are naive enough to think that others actually care

liek that these hollywood celebrities actually care that much about society/environment

if you want to "be good" you have to use your brain and not blindly follow the idiots that yell the loudest

no, thats being right

people would rather be good than be right

and you are good, if you have people say you are good

left, right, center, extreme, or moderate. the question is if people feel like they can get what they want with negotiation still. once you have a state of being where society is divided up between people who will accept only zero compramise their only option left for getting anything they want is force or disassociation. no amount of optomism changes this, deescolation seems to these people to be weakness, like your trying to get them to cave in and lose what they are fighting for, it doesent work nomatter how nice it would be if it id because deescolation doesent offer a solution, it just trys to keep the people who are supose to be working together for a solution from killing eachother before the solution is found. if the nation ever gets to the point it can no longer be the united states, then it would be better off not being the united states anymore less you have needless bloodshed in the name of "solidarity"

i say let the left and right have their own countrys, then they can do things their own way and prove their ideologys as successful or not and avoid killing eachother needlessly

thats extremism, No middle ground, no compromise, just either with us, or the enemy


Also, splitting up like that won't work, you'll just get the exact same issue again, the world WAS split liek that (West - Right) (East - Left/Soviet)

both sides slowly switched to the center, and then flipped to the other side

the fix is actual rational conversation

Have people talk, and actually learn that the majority of the Other side shares so much in common, and then build on that

the silent majority needs to speak out against no compromise, and take action. Politicians, if you can prove you have enough voters on your position to maybe swing elections, are easy enough to manipulate. But you can't be silent.

you will get those issues again

but we do tend to get the same issues again and again

im just offering something less bloody in the middle

'The majority' is silent and passive. They are not a factor in the world of politics.

the majority just wants to be left alone

and if they want to be left alone, they need to speak up now or end up in a world where they are never left alone

the majority are all those things, but i think also the majority agrees with someone. not as a whole, but every person agree with someone. if the majority never agreed with someone you wouldent be able to have wars with so many people involved instigated by these extremist groups who cant stand to live with eachother. they eventually command the middle to kill eachother in order to get to their opponents

boiling frog issue,

They want to be left alone, but its not happening fast enough 😦 so they don't get shocked into action

if you bulkanize a region based on incompatible ideological groups, what you do is give them a completely different situation they have to deal with other than simply fighting with their opponents to get what they want and ultimately never accomplish anything due to the balance of power. you get many more people who agree with eachother in the position to actually do something about their own existance and then you as a person can choose which side you want to live in.

weve lived to long in a state of "we wont try anything until everyone agrees to it"

at some point you need to let people do what they want, extremism comes from people having ideas in a system they have no hope to ever see those ideas ever be applied. the ideologically neutral world we currently live in kind of suppresses any idea from being consittered and leaves ideas to sit festering, growing more and more toxic until they choose to get what they want or die trying

that just sounds like SJW'ism 101,

What i want isn't being done! so i'm being oppressed

im discribing how people are not whether it is a good or bad thing that they are like this. as far as im conserned thats irrelivent, people dont care what you think of them when they think they need to do whatever it takes to get what they want

a, right, my bad then

i thought you were suggesting it as a solution 😛

it is a solution

well, a bad one

you have a better one to deal with people who dont accept compramise and also make up half your population?

yes

implement a constitution based on what everyone agrees on,

And give the rest the freedom to do what they wish provided it doesn't hurt/affect other people

people dont agree on anything

the only way youll get them to agree on anything is by having a different constitution for each side, in which case why not have a different country for each side?

because at that point you might aswell resort to full blown anarchy,

Because amongst those people who don't agree with side A, you'll have disagreement

So side B will want to split to side BA and BB
And those will want to split into BAA and BAB, BBA and BBB, and so forth

besides theres most certainly things people can agree upon

youll have disagreement but you wont have absolute non comprise

this is why states should have more power than the do, and the feds less.

because the big issue with your solution is that Futurama incident, "Lets show others of our peaceful ways, by force"

people don't like it in state A? move to state B.

to say that people who are on one side who dont always agree with eachother will disagree with eachother just as much as they disagree with everyone they see as an opponent is a bit silly

if half the people can find a compromise, then the entire people can to, so you're refuting your own argument from earlier

humans are the wrench in any human made system designed for humans.

thats just wrong jayred

Arch-Fiend - today at 20:47
people dont agree on anything

@I AM ERROR Yes, the 'moral high ground', as in marching to saves the lives of children from guns (but then marching to kill (future) children through mass subsidized abortion. 😉

so all the other things dont matter because i said one thing whithout enough context?

the context follows right after

i think what i think speaks clearly enough for myself that i dont have to explain that statement

it does, i'm just pointing it out

it contradicts

trying to make such a system static is just asking for it to be broken. You need to design a system to be fluid, while still maintaining general cohesion. Get the nation to agree upon something, even a majority, and its likely not to happen. Get a whole state to agree on something, there is a small but noticeable chance. a whole county, there is a decent shot, and a whole town there is a good chance.

im not going to argue over it

i'm glad we agree on that

but i would say, the grand majority would agree on actual things,
"Don't murder people" would be one i'm sure both left and right can agree on as a law

nope

Yes, get people to all support the most "common sense" things, like being opposed to terrorists (but then not criticizing people groups like Antifa that are on the terror watch list)

@Dr.Wol depends on how you define murder

if the person is "a nazi", the left would say go for it

"We're against bad things and for good things."

so no, they don't even agree on murder

murder, killing people that do no direct harm i would guess?

the nuances around any basic principle to societys is where different ideologys usually debate. any that actually debate the basic principles are so extreme that we dont even talk about them

but i fear in the current climate, even separating the people in different countries wont work :(

One side will want to kill the other country because "Their existance threatens ours"

i do legitamently think california less it has some big catastrophy soon where it threatens their population growth, may choose to leave the union and it will have a good defense against the rest of the usa by population alone

like how Antifa would attack a guy in a wheelchair

Because 1 person in a wheelchair threatens the entire trans community + antifa and stuff

doesn't california have to import water?

Yeah.

there is a decent number of people in California who don't like California, if it tried to leave the union it would either have a decent amount of people leave, or there would be its own kind of civil war and see part of it return.

Only California can still be in a drought after it rains for a week.

doesn't the constitution state that you cannot seperate?

end up with California and like east California or something

every constitution is only paper thick

i'm not sure on the laws of the US federation, afaik they can't leave,

And if they do, they're too dependent on the other states to survive