For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Weird thing to bother to write if it's true. Pathetic thing to try and change the topic to if it's not.Belinda wrote: ↑Sun Jul 13, 2025 1:13 pmI am not afraid of youFlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Jul 07, 2025 11:33 amI think overuse of AI is turning some people into terrible bores who can only discuss AI and will take over any random conversation to make it about GPT.
It's hardly "weird" to make fun of someone who goes all ad hominem as you did.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 2:05 pmWeird thing to bother to write if it's true. Pathetic thing to try and change the topic to if it's not.Belinda wrote: ↑Sun Jul 13, 2025 1:13 pmI am not afraid of youFlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Jul 07, 2025 11:33 am
I think overuse of AI is turning some people into terrible bores who can only discuss AI and will take over any random conversation to make it about GPT.
It's impossible to commit the informal ad-hominem fallacy if one is not responding to an argument. Please at least learn the basics.Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 3:16 pmIt's hardly "weird" to make fun of someone who goes all ad hominem as you did.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 2:05 pmWeird thing to bother to write if it's true. Pathetic thing to try and change the topic to if it's not.
The argument is expressed in the foregoing posts.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 3:21 pmIt's impossible to commit the informal ad-hominem fallacy if one is not responding to an argument. Please at least learn the basics.Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 3:16 pmIt's hardly "weird" to make fun of someone who goes all ad hominem as you did.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 2:05 pm
Weird thing to bother to write if it's true. Pathetic thing to try and change the topic to if it's not.
Bad luck, President Trump just said otherwise, and a simp like you would never contradict the greatWalker wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 1:21 pmWrong.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2024 10:55 amI'm not, I cited correct law for the matter you described.
*
Actually, Obama Can Be Indicted. Here’s Why.https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2025/ ... y-n4942091The Court explicitly left the door open for criminal charges—even against sitting or former presidents—if the conduct in question was personal, political, or unrelated to the legitimate functions of the presidency. And, let’s be honest: What Barack Obama did during the Russian collusion hoax wasn’t just political—it was a calculated abuse of power far outside the bounds of his official role.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... Court.htmlTrump claims Supreme Court immunity ruling spares Obama from treason case
Donald Trump admitted his own Supreme Court victory granting 'presidential immunity' means it's unlikely Barack Obama will be charged with treason over his handling of the 'Russia hoax.'
Really? Please do tell, what were the premises and the conclusion of your argument as expressed in the foregoing posts?Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 3:24 pmThe argument is expressed in the foregoing posts.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 3:21 pmIt's impossible to commit the informal ad-hominem fallacy if one is not responding to an argument. Please at least learn the basics.
No. Please do this for yourself. The posts are short and clear. You can do it if you try.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 3:28 pmReally? Please do tell, what were the premises and the conclusion of your argument as expressed in the foregoing posts?Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 3:24 pmThe argument is expressed in the foregoing posts.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 3:21 pm
It's impossible to commit the informal ad-hominem fallacy if one is not responding to an argument. Please at least learn the basics.
None of that constitutes an argument. Nor anything close. This is boring.Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Jul 07, 2025 9:36 amDon't be so suspicious! I just like to have laugh. You don't have to be sobersides all the time. BTW I can talk about etymology for hours it's one one my favourite topics. I myself am lowland Scots and I doubt if you can inform me about Anglo Saxon roots of lowland Scottish .FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Jul 07, 2025 9:23 amFewer of them than you think. Even quim is Scottish not Anglo. Shit and fuck are Anglo I believe, but IRC piss is French and **** is latin, and most of the others such as p**** are modern euphemism converted to swears.
There was nothing at all in that post that needed dumbing down. Trying to divert my umbrage with a chance to swear is the least clever tactic you have ever used.
Language evolution is social. Latinate words tend to be posher; high class as to diet ,established religions ,apparel, and academia. Political power likes to be socially exclusive. Take Trump for instance , he pretends to be like a common man and he does the common touch very well. But it's a big ploy to disguise his real political bias towards money and power.
You may be correct in your evaluation of Chat and other AIs, You need to be more explicit. I think the main dangers are one, overuse especially among children, and two , AIs are controlled by commercial interests and can sell to the highest bidder.
Trump says lots of different things, and just look at the results.
In this case what he said is that you are wrong.Walker wrote: ↑Sun Jul 27, 2025 1:33 amFlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 3:25 pm
Bad luck, President Trump just said otherwise, and a simp like you would never contradict the great
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... Court.html
Trump says lots of different things
Trump doesn't know me from the man in the moon.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 27, 2025 8:03 amIn this case what he said is that you are wrong.Walker wrote: ↑Sun Jul 27, 2025 1:33 amFlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 3:25 pm
Bad luck, President Trump just said otherwise, and a simp like you would never contradict the great
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... Court.html
Trump says lots of different things
Live with it.
Fine with me. Trump can face prosecution for all those secrets he stole then.Walker wrote: ↑Tue Jul 29, 2025 3:10 pmTrump doesn't know me from the man in the moon.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 27, 2025 8:03 amIn this case what he said is that you are wrong.
Live with it.
Suddenly you're appealing to the Authority of The Trump.
Apparently any authority will do for you when you don't know what you're talking about.
But you must face the fact that makes Trump your boy.
FlashMagaPants? Now that would be an honorable name.
*
Trump reduces Russia deadline to end Ukraine invasion to ‘10 to 12 days’ from original 50: ‘No reason to wait that long’
https://nypost.com/2025/07/28/world-new ... raine-war/
Trump said fifty days.
Now he says ten days.
What a liar.
He doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.
*
(Obviously, Trump's speaking to establish plausible deniability of personal retribution.)
In the voice of Trump: "Oh ... those criminal acts of Obama and Co. are not immune to prosecution? Well, I didn't even know that. But since that's the law, I suppose they better be off to the hoosegow. No one is above the law, don't you know."
If you're going to wear the MagaPants, you need to start thinking more realistically.