Have you heard of ollama? You can run deepseek and stuff locally super easy. I know it’s not a complete replacement, but it feels nice to use an LLM guilt free. I’ve compared the 14b distilled model from deepseek vs the paid version of ChatGPT and it made me cancel my account.
Maybe. I don’t know what it’s like in Russia at all.
Why would he need a reason though? Couldn’t he just do that at any time?
Hi 👋 go absolutely fuck yourself!
Hopefully, us rational people will get through this! Hope you have a nice day!
Also you realize that the Wikipedia article is full of sources right?
Fair enough.
Full disclosure: I’m not American.
You’re conflating research with conventions.
A dictionary is generally considered a reference source rather than an academic source. While it provides standardized definitions, it does not offer original research, analysis, or scholarly discussion. However, specialized dictionaries (e.g., the Oxford English Dictionary or medical/legal dictionaries) can be cited in academic work when defining key terms.
Do you expect to find a research paper on the definition of terrorism?
What does that even mean? You don’t like the dictionaries or Wikipedia and won’t say why. How are we supposed to talk about anything?
Yeah if you want to change the definitions of all of the words to fit your narrative, then sure… whatever you say buddy
If you imagine (fantasize, really) about a pragmatic person with liberal ideas, what party would they join? I think Democrat. I just don’t want to classify all those people as evil.
Clearly we disagree on somethings but the important things are:
That’s a fair point, and I accept your argument. Honestly, I’ll think on it more.
Here’s a list for you to read
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes
Using a definition is not an appeal to authority because definitions are conventions of language, not subjective claims requiring expert validation. An appeal to authority relies on credibility rather than reasoning, while a definition clarifies meaning for effective communication.
It’s worth something that they at least try to lie about it, no? Like we’re not really at “openly” yet.
I’m just making a point about the language used to try to help you be more convincing. When you say stuff like the dems openly support genocide, I imagine a clip of Biden gleefully cheering on the deaths of innocents.
I get it’s semantics, and you’re correct in a way it is “openly” supporting that, but it just sounds a bit hyperbolic to me.
Don’t forget, we ultimately agree.
Eh, I think id call it covert or something like that. Saying “openly” implies they like/enjoy genocide or something.
I think you can make a strong case that the US foreign policy in this region is garbage, and I agree with you, they’ve done terrible things.
But I still don’t think that they would openly support genocide. If they had, I think you would’ve been able to find a source for that.
Just so you don’t get the wrong idea here: I agree with what you’re saying but I disagree with the language you’re using. I think it undermines your point.
Okay, I’m not going to claim that US democrats are perfect but saying that they openly support genocide is extremely hyperbolic and undermines your argument.
The US has done a LOT of terrible things and both parties had a hand in it. I wouldn’t say either of them support genocide.
Terrorism, in its broadest sense, is the use of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological aims.[1]
I’m calling the US forces terrorists because that’s what they deserve. State sanction has nothing to do with it.
I’ve never defended the Houthis.
So to clarify, you are saying that all of those women and children are not innocent? Are you saying that UNICEF is lying?
Insane you think the US killing innocents is far fetched. Like ever hear of agent orange?
My point is that if you kill innocents as acceptable collateral damage, it doesn’t make you morally superior. It’s pretty much the same as them, just the other side.
I’m not “backing the instigator of the civil war” I’m saying you can’t support either group of terrorists.
Oh really? So all of the sources talking about woman and children dying, they weren’t innocent?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_2025_United_States_attacks_in_Yemen
And I love the “in this case” because you know damn well there’s tons of collateral damage caused by US forces. Or as I think I’m going to start calling them, terrorists.
Awww hell yeah this is amazing news! Thank you
(Also why didn’t I think about mastodon- I’m such an idiot)
Very true. I think the tank, much like the cannon, will still have its own niche use case but isn’t the silver bullet so many armies saw it as. Happens a lot I think