This is useful for dispelling the hype around ChatGPT and for demonstrating the limits of general purpose LLMs.

But that’s about it. This is not a “win” for old school game engines vs new ones. Stockfish uses deep reinforcement learning and is one of the strongest chess engines in the world.

The fact that when it comes to politics I see Americans nowadays keep repeating over and over and over again “this can’t be done”, “they don’t have the power”, “that will never happen”, is to me astonishing. When I was growing up, America was where things HAPPENED. What happened to you guys? Where did this learned helplessness come from?

So your party structures are broken and unable to produce good outcomes? Change them. Reform them. Update them. What the fuck is wrong with you people? You made democracy into a fossil that you no longer fit in and you’re despairing. It’s supposed to be a living breathing thing that evolves all the time. WTF.

Never heard of activism, have you.

I thought it started on October 7.

And CP is not suing the shit out of them?

Remember how Dukakis got tanked by a goofy helmet? Yea, Harris sank when she couldn’t propose any change from Biden.

I actually absolutely agree with you. I think Varoufakis is playing the gadfly role here, the kinds of provocative questions he poses are challenges to do better.

Israel is exercising a naval blockade of Gaza in line with the war between the two parties and based on prize law is actually allowed to board and inspect all ships heading to Gaza.

Yea, you just made that up.

Israel’s blockade is far from uncontroversially legal:

Crucially, a legal blockade IS NOT ALLOWED TO STOP HUMANITARIAN AID: https://theconversation.com/there-are-clear-laws-on-enforcing-blockades-israels-interception-of-the-madleen-raises-serious-questions-258562

That’s not “free” as in “you can go any time”. That’s “sign here that you did something that I think is illegal and that you don’t think is illegal and that also recognizes my right to define what is and what is not illegal and then you can go”.

Many people on Lemmy went from critizing Israel for commiting genocide (which is a fact) to openly supporting the Hamas during the last year.

This is an extraordinary claim. Please provide your extraordinary evidence.

Not really, it’s just logical conclusion of believing in a project but then watching it fail repeatedly, and finally questioning whether it’s worth saving. His actual proposal is for a deeper democratic federalism, but he doesn’t think that will fly, because he’s disappointed.

No it doesn’t actually. His argument starts at about 29:50 of the video. As far as I can tell, he argues that military Keynesianism (the idea of using military spending to drive economic growth) works in the US because it has a federal government and a unified military-industrial complex that redistributes contracts to stimulate weaker regions. Varoufakis criticizes this model as morally corrosive, saying it requires endless wars to justify continued production and spending. This is not a new criticism, that’s just Truman. Next he says that Europe, lacking a federal structure or unified military-political command structure, cannot even replicate this system in any coherent or democratic way. He sees recent EU defense initiatives as a hollow imitation that is just political theater making the analogy with the “Green Deal”, which was basically abandoned despite big promises. Basically, he says that military Keynesianism, like the Green Deal are both “smoke and mirrors”, that don’t offer neither real growth nor genuine security.

That’s it. That’s the argument. What is hypocritical about that?

Elsewhere in the interview, he makes the argument that the EU should either go towards some kind of democratic federalism (in which case, one could assume that there would exist the framework for controlling the military-industrial complex) or just call it quits, because the current model is just not viable. That’s coherent with his view of military Keynesianism above.

His thinking on Ukraine is pragmatic and calling us on our own hypocrisy. He criticizes Western hypocrisy for arming Ukraine without committing troops and condemns attempts to mimic the U.S. military-industrial model, which he sees as both unethical and structurally impossible for Europe. That’s where his Hitler line comes in, that if Western leaders truly believed Putin was a danger like Hitler, they would actually fully commit, instead of the tragedy we currently have. And that’s a valid argument, right? If we truly believe that Russia is a real and present danger, enough pussyfooting, enough half-measures, go big or go home. Federalize, arm, fight. If not, what the fuck are we doing?

Your comment is a bit incoherent. Its first part seems to imply it’s a needed thing that we should do, the second that it is a dangerous thing that we should avoid. Which is it?

That stoic look. That’s what life under occupation is like. Everyday casual cruelty.

Sure, but why?

Britain was already an integrated member that decided to exit. That’s very different from opposing new deep integration.

We might not have a great Nazi gold to citizens ratio but our resources to citizens ratio is more than Iceland and Norway combined many many times over.

I never said that EU is an authoritarian institution, you made that up.

My argument is for keeping our existing sovereignty, such as for example being able to keep our own currency, and our more welcoming immigration policies. Canada doesn’t need the Euro, doesn’t need the ECB, we don’t need the Dublin treaty and we don’t need the Stability and Growth Pact.

Anything the EU does right (eg the GDPR) we can adopt and adapt for ourselves already. There is absolutely nothing holding us back from becoming better.

The EU is a complicated institution, parts of it are structurally neoliberal, in the same way that parts of Canadian institutions are structurally colonialist. So we really don’t need the craziness of European politics internal dysfunction. We have enough of that of our own.

Keep the snark coming.

It’s your father who should have pulled out.

So you’re saying that the EU doesn’t work in a way that allows closer cooperation and integration without membership. That’s factually wrong. This model works for Switzerland, Norway and Iceland.

Got any more snark?

What part of what I wrote are you referring to?

Good luck hosting the world cup.