The federal conclusion will inevitably be that he was a so-called nihilist violent extremist (NVE)

That is a lot of confidence in the administration to let law enforcement do its job properly and not politicize the findings.

Well if he wants to say that chatgpt can replace even CEOs, then he needs to be the sort of CEO chatgpt could replace

From my experience, a big contributor to their financial success is their unwillingness to recognize any of that.

You don’t have to run fast, just faster than the bear. They just need to be smarter than the investors who aren’t generally all that smart.

While an even smarter person could respond to nuance, then that person loses the investors who cannot follow. So at some point it becomes a liability to be thoughtful and nuanced.

Think that’s a fair assessment. On the one hand we are more connected than ever and sentiment travels fast and echo chambers let dangerous extremist thought fester. On the other hand, Germans were experiencing just a much worse actual living situation.

I’d even say all indications are that his leanings don’t matter in the specifics of this event.

It’s probably more informative that folks can credibly have theories for either leaning to lead to this event. Lots of reasons that could believably drive any political leaning over the edge if they are close.

I will point out one thing that should be obvious, the shooter was only 22. So it’s possible he doesn’t have a very baked and stable political ideology. I knew a hard core outwardly homophobic conservative at 17 who came out as gay and did theater by 20. I knew a fairly liberal person when she was about 18 that over the years got to a place where she publicly praised Trump and called COVID a hoax and the vaccine a conspiracy. No idea how that happened, even as I saw it first hand.

Given the situation, it is at least clear he was unhinged if he would get to this point, either way. I would have hoped this would be a lesson for people that people get dangerously moved by angry rhetoric, but a lot of folks are ramping up rhetoric instead.

Yeah:

“The only perpetrator arguably from the Left is Black nationalist Quintez Brown.”

So they did acknowledge it, but kind of gave it a pass because he wasn’t “affiliated with the Democratic Party or any other mainstream reformist, progressive or leftist organisation”.

I think it’s still a bit up in the air about whether Tyler Robinson had a consistent ideology. He is 22, an age where political leanings can be all over the place and evolve pretty rapidly. Whatever the case, it seems he operated alone. So we can consider how much online rhetoric influenced him one way or another, but it doesn’t seem like there was any organizational pressure or even a forum that had a chance to talk him into or out of his plan.

The article does make a broader point well supported by data, broadly speaking the right has gotten more violent and we don’t see a similar pattern on the left. No matter which way Tyler lands or just attributed to less ostensibly political ideology, I think the trend is still valid. It’s somewhat less dangerous if they can definitively establish him as a Fuentes like, but I fear he might be credibly “grown out of it”.

I could see someone being frustrated that from a third party, it looks like you are not responding to a reply and that person could spin that as a concession that they were right

I could see a compromise, where a direct reply from such a blocked/muted person is allowed, but indicated so that people are aware a response could not have been done.

Right, but it says “Mario”, and that was not the first game that featured the character.

I’m not a huge fan of anyone meeting this sort of end.

A little mixed feelings because on the other hand I have a bit of an appreciation of the context of a man that has openly consistently declared gun deaths as somewhat acceptable getting killed by a gun.

But ultimately, I would have rather seen him get his ass kicked or a few handgun bullets to the vest to give him some appropriate fear and consequences without him becoming a martyr. Ideally i would have liked him to just get scared into not actively trying to troll people the way he did. Further for it to be clear from the very first moment that it was MAGA infighting, to avoid the incident increasing an already strained division and maybe show the movement the dangerous game they are playing.

Left out being nagged to death about other products and services microsoft thinks you should buy.

Of all the people I was worried about materially contributing to the mess, Charlie Kirk was pretty low on the list.

He said vile stuff, but he was not himself a wielder of power. His rhetoric and words had power, he did not. His death in this manner has given strength to that rhetoric and those words without removing any of his meaningful influence to the system.

Better that these folks suffer the fear of what they court, to have their own MAGA fanatics turn against them with violence that scares them, but leaves them largely intact to have them retreat from their position without becoming martyrs.

Now if some folks actively wielding the power in harmful ways meet some ends, I might have a little less mixed feelings about it.

I will confess to perhaps not celebrating, but appreciating the connection between his sociopathic stance on gun deaths and he himself joining a group he himself said we shouldn’t be so concerned about.

Yeah, worried about this and the punishment doesn’t fit the crime, and too much room for his death to be weaponized, like you say.

Would have much rather him taken a few to the vest from a handgun from a pissed off obviously MAGA person. Give him some pain and a good scare to have him realize personally just how risky the hornet’s nest is that he is stirring. Something that might be a close enough call for others to see without becoming a rallying cry and a clear link to the violence of the rhetoric without a chance to blame ‘the other’.

I will have empathy

How dare you dishonor his memory.

Or the neck hit was more chance. There’s an assumption that the shooter hit precisely where he was aiming, but it could have just been where the bullet happened to hit, close to the amining point, but not exact.

Yeah, without knowing context, you might think it’s someone admitting that we need gun control, but no, his point was that we shouldn’t care about the gun deaths so much…

Yes, but just like quality, the people in charge of money aren’t totally on top of security either. They just see superficially convincing tutorial fodder and start declaring they will soon be able to get rid of all those pesky people. Even if you convince them a human does it better, they are inclined to think ‘good enough for the price’.

So you can’t say “it’s no better than human at quality” and expect those people to be discouraged, it has to be pointed out how wildly off base it is.

Then there’s the phase where you are watching something and people are trying to remember if the actor is still alive or not

One issue that remains is that the LLM doesn’t care if it is telling the truth or lying. To be a CEO, it needs to be more inclined to lie.

If, hypothetically, the code had the same efficacy and quality as human code, then it would be much cheaper and faster. Even if it was actually a little bit worse, it still would be amazingly useful.

My dishwasher sometimes doesn’t fully clean everything, it’s not as strong as a guarantee as doing it myself. I still use it because despite the lower quality wash that requires some spot washing, I still come out ahead.

Now this was hypothetical, LLM generated code is damn near useless for my usage, despite assumptions it would do a bit more. But if it did generate code that matched the request with comparable risk of bugs compared to doing it myself, I’d absolutely be using it. I suppose with the caveat that I have to consider the code within my ability to actual diagnose problems too…