Exactly.

This is a partial answer, with possibly some misinformation. Should I just shut my mouth and hope that someone who actually knows what's happening will answer you? Yes. Yes I should. But I'm a bit drunk, so you're just going to have to read my incomplete (and possibly wrong) explanation.

Brianna Wu got famous from gamergate. She got harassed by gamers. I don't remember what for, possibly they thought she slept with someone for good reviews on a game? That or she criticized a game that maybe an ex had worked on. Shit, I dunno, I'm actually absolutely making stuff up. Well, I've come this far, let's keep going! TERFs are certain she's trans, I'm not certain she's trans, but maybe she is? I'm unsure. Not that it matters, she was a woman that gamergate targeted, of that I am certain. She's now just the most annoying lib of all time, but keeps trying to draw on progressive cred from being harassed by gamers during the gamergate era. I suspect she's going to do a "why I left the left" situation, but maybe you don't even have to do that to be a grifter these days.

Long story short, she was harassed during gamergate, she's extremely, unfortunately lib, and it's better if you pay no attention to her twitter takes.

This article is so fucking funny. "Yes, Ansar Allah said they're responsible for this attack, yes, all the evidence points towards them being responsible for this attack, but are we really sure it was them, really?" It really feels like whoever wrote this piece is really trying to minimize how capable Ansar Allah are, especially since they blame "human error" (by the Israelis) for the lack of warning about the attack when Ansar Allah has said this is a new type of drone that is undetectable by radar.

I guess I'm just more willing to take Ansar Allah at their word than whoever wrote this article, and I find it deeply amusing how much hedging you have to do if you refuse to believe that Ansar Allah is capable of doing the things they say they're doing.

Hahahaha, this is what made me quit twitch, for good. I'll do the same with YouTube. It'll suck, yes, but it'll ultimately be good for me and my mental health. 3 years from now I won't miss YouTube.

Huh, Jonathan Chait likes charter schools. He says so in this terrible article. Well, he doesn't seem to want to use the phrase "charter schools", instead just talking repeatedly about "school reform". Which is indeed a euphemism for wanting charter schools, as I had to click a link to learn.

Why use a euphemism here? Why not just say you're in favor of charter schools? Is he embarrassed about it? But then why say anything at all? I'm puzzled

I'm going to push back on just one thing you've said, which is that you don't think anyone could change any minds here. That's blatantly false. I have my mind changed all the time, and I've seen it happen with other people on here too. We're willing to have our minds changed and we understand that we're fallible and other people know more than we do about various things.

I think maybe what you meant to say is that you understand that hexbears can't be convinced to go back to being libs. And that's true. I'll never again think that the Democrats are anything other than my enemies. I used to think they were my allies, but I've changed my mind and I see now that they never were and never will be. So in that sense I guess you're right, but politics is so much bigger and more complicated than just red vs blue, elephant vs donkey.

Free yourself from the two-party bourgeois democracy you were born into. You're young, you have so much learning to do and so much time in which to do it! Lurk here and actually read the things people post. I've learned so much from my fellow hexbears and I hope you will too.

I get my dissenting opinions simply by existing in the society in which I exist. The hexbear "echo chamber" as you put it is small and powerless. This place is a tiny refuge, a brief respite from all the shitiness I see in my day to day life.

Hexbear isn't an "echo chamber" in the same way the republican media circuit is, because we have to leave it. Republicans never do. They can read articles and watch talking heads and never once be challenged on their beliefs. As a communist, I'm challenged on my beliefs every single day. Most articles I read and most talking heads I watch disagree with me.

We respond to lost libs like you for a few reasons. One is maybe we'll change a mind, not necessarily yours but perhaps a lurker reading the conversation. Another is entertainment. It's really funny when someone wanders in here and is the living embodiment of the memeing we do. Sometimes we want an argument, usually because we're having a shitty day and just want to be an asshole on the Internet. This isn't a good motivation and I wish it didn't happen, but it does. None of us is immune.

You're getting responses not because we're unused to being challenged, but because we want to respond to you for whatever reason. My response here is explaining our inner workings so hopefully you can come away from this thread seeing us as people with ideas that we believe. We haven't been tricked into thinking as we do, most of us go against the grain of our societies to come to our beliefs. I want to change a mind today, ideally yours, and I've chosen a gentle tone full of candor to try to do so. Will it be effective? I have no way of knowing, but I hope so. Please realize we're not bots or russian agents or trapped in a cult or whatever, we're humans with thoughts and experiences that have led us to our beliefs.

Where do you get the idea that this tech is less than a year old? Because that's incredibly false. People have been working with neural nets to do language processing for at least a decade, and probably a lot longer than that. The mathematics underlying this stuff is actually incredibly simple and has been known and studied since at least the 90's. Any recent "breakthroughs" are more about computing power than a theoretical shift.

I hate to tell you this, but I think you've bought into marketing hype.

zifnab's comment has links to:

• The Washington Post
• A paper from Duke University
• The Guardian

These seem to me like sources that wouldn't usually be prominent in facebook conspiracy theory groups.

Can you please tell me what the issue is with zifnab's comment? Why do you feel like the comment would be more at home in a facebook conspiracy theory group?

That's not the issue. She is a public figure and has shared her own photos. The issue is that Channel 7 falsely implied she regrets her transition. Channel 7 is trying to use a happily transitioned trans person as an example of someone harmed by childhood transition, and that's slimy as hell

I don't need to see fascist posts on the internet. I get plenty of that just existing in America, thank you very much. It's not "dangerous" to have a place without fascist rhetoric. (Side note, lemmy isn't such a place, although it is better than reddit)

The source for this? Radio Free Asia interviewed one (1) anonymous person.