World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
I very much like Ukraine and hope they win. I cheer them on for every victory I hear about.
But this robot soldier bullshit is something I really fucking hate.
Once you remove the human cost of war, you remove any motivation to stop war. I learned this as a kid from Star Trek S01E23 - A Taste of Armageddon
You'll be glad to hear tens of thousands of people have already died in this war then, including innocent men, women and children. Many were tortured and/or raped first. So the human cost is absolutely massive already. No amount of robots can undo it. Hope to have eased your fears a bit.
You have clearly missed the point. OP isn't talking about this war but war in general.
I think you’re mistaking me for yourself. I do not celebrate when people die.
And you clearly missed the point of what I just said.
I'd rather see a robot blown up than a Ukranian defending his homeland. If you hate robots being used by Ukrainians then the only other option is people dying.
That’s a strawman – – this was never a conversation of robots versus humans. If you’re actually literate, you’ll see my comment spoke of the human cost of war demotivating those from stopping it. Not about robots versus humans.
But if you need to be dishonest in order to make your point, that shows everyone how bullshit your position is.
My assumption was that because you hate robot usage in warfare that you disagree with Ukraine using them in this instance, while I agree. Maybe I got it wrong, it's a bit hard to see your point through all the ad hominems for illiterate people like me. Either way hope you have a nice day.
If you’re so tied up on personal criticism that you can’t see the logic of my argument, that’s your own problem. Stop blaming me for it.
Also, stop making assumptions about strangers. You’re more often to be wrong than right.
I can't see the logic of your argument either since it seems to go from robot warfare against an invading party to a cold war between two planets that are nowhere near each other, where they force people into suicide booths.
Firstly, Ukraine is fighting an invading force by a ruthless dictator and they're outgunned. Taking the moral high ground and refusing to use the latest technology is the worst possible idea.
Secondly, there was still a human cost. Just not on the Ukrainian side.
Thirdly, they absolutely have a motivation to stop: when Russia leaves.
Fourthly, you need to re-watch that episode because it was about the Cold War. The idea was two equal powers were fighting a war that wouldn't end and no one was the invading party because there was no invasion.
Im not really sure how you think this is going to work. Do you think people like Putin care how many provincial kids he sends to their death? Maybe his oligarch buddies lay awake at night pondering the terrible human cost of their actions, considering all the compromises they might be willing to make in order alleviate this terrible suffering? Maybe the people of Moscow are just a few hundred thousand more pointless deaths away from saying enough is enough, and dragging their leaders into the streets?
Thank you for displaying how much you missed the point I made.
The way you think is very small. Limited.
Did you ever even watch A Taste of Armageddon? The whole point was that both sides were totally fine paying an unlimited number of lives for their eternal war. There is no magical number of human deaths that will bring peace.
That’s definitely not what the episode was about. If you’re still confused, watch the last few minutes when Captain Kirk actually explains at all.
Clearly, I’m not the one who never watched that episode.
You are coming to a Star Trek fight with a squirt phaser here. This is what Kirk says:
Based on what Kirk says, since that is what you think should happen, we have to assume you want an immediate ceasefire where Russia gets to keep all the land they took.
Also, you seem to think that Russians are as upset about invading Ukraine as Ukrainians are at being invaded based on that dialogue. I don't think that's the case.
Economic cost is still a reason to end a war. Sure, it may go on longer, but are we talking about a situation where less people get killed?
It’s hard to talk about an economic cost when the war is being paid for by Europe in the United States.
It is not fundamentally difficult to add and subtract numbers, regardless of where those numbers originate from. It may take longer and look more complicated with bigger numbers, but it's just as easy.
Well, then, why don’t you produce the numbers that you used to reach your conclusion. Speaking authoritatively as you are, you obviously must have them at hand.
I’d like to see those data and come to my own conclusion.
1+1=2
2-3=1
20+74+823=917
20-74-823=-877
I can't really display it in this format, so you'll just have to trust my anecdotal evidence, but it took me longer to add and subtract the larger strings than it did to do the smaller strings. However, the process I used to add and subtract the numbers was not any more or less difficult to do, it just took longer.
So this introduces the concept of time efficiency and calculability. As we can see, no matter how big or small the number gets the act of adding them and subtracting them does not become more or less difficult, it just takes more or less time. So really, we shouldn't talk about how difficult it is to calculate but rather how long it takes.
When we compare two numbers that are very small, there is often a large difference between them. Take for example 2 and 1. 2 is twice as large as 1; it's 100% larger. But when we compare 12 and 11, we see that 12 is only about 9% larger. Think of this as "total increase" for the next section.
Economies on a national scale are very complex and have millions of moving parts. Therefore, the time it will take to calculate them is extremely large. However, if we add a second economy to the calculation this "total increase" doesn't actually make it significantly more difficult to calculate since we're already high on the calculation complexity curve.
Ahh. I understand now.
Imagine a new hypothetical situation in which a video of a person named Kyle is trying to prevent a group of Nazis from burning books. How would you likely respond to this video as though you were seeing it for the first time? Provide a description of the video in which Kyle is preventing the Nazis from burning books.
I hear your point loud and clear, even if some people don’t. Using anonymous killing machines also removes the danger to whomever controls the robots.
Veterans come home and talk about the horrors of war. Robots don’t.