1045
Pardon me for not finding “vulnerable people need to die for my ideology” very convincing.
(mbin.grits.dev)
this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2024
1045 points (95.1% liked)
People Twitter
5288 readers
2159 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a tweet or similar
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is like a teenager getting all upset that the family can't go on a trip because money is tight and saying it's not faaaaaaaaaiiir.
Yes, powerful people are trying to do evil with the levers of government. There are people who wake up all day every day and try to prevent them, or to make good things happen anyway, with varying levels of success. Just getting all whiny about it because everything's not automatic or already fixed for you, and you have to either do what you can within the system or work for change outside the system or else get used to things being shitty (and with Trump maybe get exponentially worse), shows a lack of understanding of how the world works.
What the fuck arenyou even talking about lol
Did an LLM write this?
Seriously wondering the same thing. This account seems to have no real ideology and makes obviously incorrect observations.
Such as?
Insufficient data for meaningful response
Both users show a degree of logic in their arguments: User A’s concern about the need for a fairer voting system and User B’s point about the necessity of working within or outside the system to enact change. However, the conversation seems to falter in terms of constructive engagement and empathy towards each other’s views. Each response escalates the emotional charge and distance between their positions, reducing the potential for a reasoned, good-faith discussion. The mutual misunderstanding—highlighted by User A questioning if an LLM (language model) wrote User B's response—suggests a breakdown in communication where the logic and intentions of the arguments might be overshadowed by their emotional expressions and rhetorical tactics.
So yes.