Un trop vert timide

Suppose a cop tripped over a students water bottle, hit his head on the ground and died. Did the student murder that cop?

Sure, if the student intended to harm the cop, and slipped it directly under his foot when he went to step. That would be a fair equivalent, and I would say yeah, the student is in the wrong.

I think the previous user’s reversal comparison was a bad faith rhetoric trap. A good faith reciprocal comparison would have been something like that :

Suppose that a student brought an explosive device to the protest, primed it, then threw it at the cop or in their vicinity, and that the device’s explosion maimed the cop. Did the student maim the cop ?

Considering your answer, which I agee with, we would probably both answer “Yes” to this question. In my opinion, as in the real case where the student was maimed, whether the victim did make the right decision to handle the explosive menace or not is not relevant.

You can’t throw something intended to harm others, and then cry fowl. The cop is the reason that students hand is gone. No clue why you would say otherwise, except to victim blame.

Exactly. A “weapon by nature” (designed to be used as weapon in the first place) was used by the cop, so this cop carries heavy responsibilites for the consequences of their action.

Source ?

Please tone your condescendence down.

Those responsibles for MLP (and her kind) rise to power are not their opponents. The main responsible are themselves, their allies, and their goons/hench•wo•men.

The narrative about the protesters being responsible ignore the decades-long events chronology, the contribution of these big companies to our suffering, the proganda aganist the protesters even when unsupported by facts, etc. It is a blame shifting narrative.

The irony: a contributing factor to both E. Macron elections was his stated posture as a shield against far-right. (M. Le Pen was his second round opponent in both elections.)

Multiple attempts were filmed. At least one attempt by the “anti felony brigade” (“Brigade Anti Criminelle”, or “BAC”)

Yup, agreed, same French cops that:

• Count their self-inflicted injuries as injuries inflicted by their “suspect” (target).
• Don’t follow most laws and rules about weapon usage, about arrest procedure, about state neutrality, about non-discrimination, rape, etc
• Cover their violent colleagues up.
• Threaten a young driver (of color, of course) with “I will blow your head off”, while pointing their gun directly to the target’s head. Then, when the target drives away to flee, the cop successfully shoots to kill. The whole police institution defend the murderer citing a recent law that in effect extend the legitimate cases for the use of (lethal) force by police to “suspect” that would “probably” harm others while fleeing. (preventive defensive violence… reminds me of something). Some people even donated moreqthan a million euros to said cop to pay for his legal proceedings. The murder was filmed, and the video shared day one, disproving the police lies about the murder from the start.
• Confiscate protests signs that don’t please them enough.
• Consider police violence and abuses as insignificant, always justified and proportionnate, then treat graffitis and stickers from protesters as violent crimes.
• Sometimes beat up random people carrying palestinian flags in protests.
• Throw projectiles (I guess grenades, from the impact sound) from behind the protester lines, probably to trigger their colleagues charge. (And deny doing so when they’re caught red-handed by an elected official.)
• Are fully armored in protests, get collectively knocked down with some serious injuries by their weapon mishandling, but still use these weapons on civilians in plain clothes, directly aiming at them.
• etc

Our (french) police intitutions are authoritarian, lethally violent, lying. Our ministers too, since they publicly defend and encourage these intitutions crimes.

Reminder of my only two previous comments in this topic:

Both can be true.

and

I’d understand if these tools were small scale, eco-friendly, ethically developped and trained, and owned by the workers.

Considering most LLM and AI/AI-adjacent tools used are large-scale tools created and owned by big greedy corporations, I’d say the tools themselves are a product of late stage capitalism, thus the bad results they produce are results of simultaneoulsly :

• the tools themselves
• why they were created
• how they were created
• why they are used
• how they are used
• …
• late stage capitalism (which also influnce the previous items)

End of the reminder.

Your answer to that was:

You started by saying they produce the issues, but are now explaining what I said above, that they are a product of upstream social issues.

What motivated my answer is:

Most events have multiple causes and multiple consequences. All of them can also interfere with each other. They can form retroaction loops too.

What I was explicitely saying is:

These tools were created and specialised for late-stage capitalism goals. There will be some common consequences, including bad ones, between usage by the big corpos and usage by random persons, whatever their skills. That’s why I said that both these takes are true:

The output of LLMs is massively increased global warming, increased prices of goods and services, decreased number of jobs, increased numbers of bugs in software, massive increase in wealth migration from poor to the rich, and increased surveillance. None of that has to do with the quality of the users. Just using it at all results in all of those things.

and

those things are the outputs out late-stage capitalism.

It seems that we disagree about my view, but don’t attribute to me shit I didn’t say to fight this false argument.

So…

Is this worth discussing.

Apparently no, at least not when you oversimplify causality and misrepresent what I said. Still worth argumenting for others to have more arguments to weight.

Now, this discussion looks to me like the stupid “debate” around “guns kill people” VS “guns don’t kill, only the people using them do” in the specific context of gun control laws.

And also, fuck capitalism, and other systems of exploitation, oppression, domination.

I’d understand if these tools were small scale, eco-friendly, ethically developped and trained, and owned by the workers.

Considering most LLM and AI/AI-adjacent tools used are large-scale tools created and owned by big greedy corporations, I’d say the tools themselves are a product of late stage capitalism, thus the bad results they produce are results of simultaneoulsly :

• the tools themselves
• why they were created
• how they were created
• why they are used
• how they are used
• …
• late stage capitalism (which also influnce the previous items)

Both can be true.

Putting aside the doom recompilation meme, I find this idea conceptually funny.