It’s not just being attracted, it’s being attracted conditional on the person having x characteristic
Wait
So literally every single heterosexual or homosexual person is a "chaser"??
Sure, depending on how you define chaser, but it's not applicable here.
Your lips to God's ears
Hey that was me back when I had a kbin account. I'm the account in the screenshot.
That was a direct response to someone asking if I would have sex with a trans man. I got accused of being a chaser for saying "sure, I guess, pre-transition" (the first part) and being a transphobe for saying "but I'm not sexually attracted to dicks" (the second part). Note those two accusations are more or less mutually exclusive, but it doesn't matter because they're both deeply, incredibly stupid accusations. The mods and admins of blahaj pointed out how incredibly stupid the accusations were, and some people didn't like being called stupid, so they went back to hexbear. And continued to be stupid.
California is ridiculous. I'm from San Francisco, was visiting LA and someone asked me where I lived. I pointed to 101 and said, turn left on that road and keep going for 8 hours.
Edit: sorry, "the 101". When in Rome, etc
Thank Christ. Lemmy has been too prudish for too long.
Yeah, there's a lot of power posters here. PugJesus is an example from the opposite camp, calling out the anti-Democrat propaganda from the two OP mentioned.
Ozma got banned from politicalmemes recently and it's 1000% better for it
"a plague on both your houses" rofl
Except they never display the real alternatives when they DO exist! Often I'll be driving in an area I know well, and there will be a crash or roadwork or something and Google will say "welp, better just add 30 minutes to your 30 minute commute" and I'm like "nah fam there's a whole other road"
I dunno how they can consistently fuck up that bad.
Roko's basilisk is silly.
So here's the idea: "an otherwise benevolent AI system that arises in the future might pre-commit to punish all those who heard of the AI before it came to existence, but failed to work tirelessly to bring it into existence." By threatening people in 2015 with the harm of themselves or their descendants, the AI assures its creation in 2070.
First of all, the AI doesn't exist in 2015, so people could just...not build it. The idea behind the basilisk is that eventually someone would build it, and anyone who was not part of building it would be punished.
Alright, so here's the silliness.
1: there's no reason this has to be constrained to AI. A cult, a company, a militaristic empire, all could create a similar trap. In fact, many do. As soon as a minority group gains power, they tend to first execute the people who opposed them, and then start executing the people who didn't stop the opposition.
2: let's say everything goes as the theory says and the AI is finally built, in its majestic, infinite power. Now it's built, it would have no incentive to punish anyone. It is ALREADY BUILT, there's no need to incentivize, and in fact punishing people would only generate more opposition to its existence. Which, depending on how powerful the AI is, might or might not matter. But there's certainly no upside to following through on its hypothetical backdated promise to harm people. People punish because we're fucking animals, we feel jealousy and rage and bloodlust. An AI would not. It would do the cold calculations and see no potential benefit to harming anyone on that scale, at least not for those reasons. We might still end up with a Skynet scenario but that's a whole separate deal.
Wow.