Matt and Trey really don't give a fuck. They tried to show Muhammed in multiple cartoons, and when the network vociferously shouted them down about it (because it might get them killed or their offices attacked), they snuck him in anyway in multiple places and just didn't tell anyone. When one of the foundational members of their cast didn't want them to trash Scientology, they trashed it ten times harder and told him not to let the door hit him on the ass on the way out. They made out with each other for a long time in "Baseketball."

However valuable or not you feel like their message / their humor is, they are among the very few voices in mainstream media who are simply unafraid and doing their own thing, completely without reservation.

Trump has inappropriately promoted and used various AI depictions of some seriously fucked up shit, and therefore would immediately lose in court if trying to sure based on the existing laws.

Yeah, that makes zero sense.

1. The Supreme Court has ruled that the President can't be charged from crimes committed while in office. That's why he's walking free today instead of rotting in a fucking jail cell where he belongs.
2. The commission of a crime does not suddenly excuse everyone else from committing said crime.

Are you out of the loop?

Trump had posted to his own Truth account a week ago an AI generated video of Obama being arrested in the White House.

Are you a fucking bot, or just ignorant?

The way this works in a legal sense is that Trump would be fucking foolish to try and sue a CABLE show (not under FCC purview) that did what he did. Present an obviously fake depiction of something as fact.

Not only will he lose in court because Trump set the precedent for doing so, he will be open to countersuit just because of that fact.

Your post does not cover CIVIL SUITS, which is where this all would lie in the courts.

Trump will lose, open himself up to discovery, and allow an entire binge by legal process into every little part of what is going on right now, which his lawyers will not allow.

I think you're commenting on something you don't understand, no offense.

Your post does not cover CIVIL SUITS

You're the one who's referring to criminal law:

would immediately lose in court if trying to sure based on the existing laws

The defense of "nuh-uh, he did it first" will simply not hold water in a court of law.

Discovery does not work the way you think it does.

I think you're commenting on something you don't understand, no offense.

Laws still exist for civil suits.

Next.

Of course they do. That was my point. You're the one acting like the law doesn't apply to civil suits.

Next.

What do you mean? The article just points out that the show’s demographic may somewhat overlap with, for example, Rogan’s demographic:

The show’s core demographic—predominantly men aged 18 to 49—overlaps meaningfully with the audiences of figures like Joe Rogan and, to a lesser extent, Andrew Tate.

They are not saying that Rogan listeners also watch South Park, or that South Park is republican. The article is just pointing out that this demographic of men aged between 18 and 49 overlaps with “Joe Rogan[’s] and, to a lesser extent, Andrew Tate[’s demographic].”

They even frame this as a potential advantage, saying that

South Park holds a rare cultural position in that it can potentially speak directly to groups adjacent to the MAGA movement without preaching, pandering, or being immediately dismissed [emphasis added].

I don’t know about you, but it didn’t feel like it was calling South Park fans like us Joe Rogan listeners. It felt more like the article was pointing out that some, maybe even a majority, of fans could also be Rogan fans, which would make the audiences that South Park reaches with this anti-Trump episode especially influential.

Idk; I certainly didn’t feel offended or anything like that, but I might be misunderstanding you here.

I have a feeling they're going to be fine moneywise whatever happens. Their personal safety is probably fine. Maybe not, but probably they don't have to worry too much.

It's still courage that they're doing it.

You're right. The link below is not the only place I've seen the quote cited, just the first I found in a hurry.

The host asked Thiel ‘You would prefer the human race to endure, right?’

Thiel hesitated, doing some umm-ing and ahh-ing, even at one point saying ‘I don’t know’.

The billionaire went on to clarify and said: “Yes [I would like us to endure] but I also would like us to radically solve these problems.

unilad.com/news/us-news/peter-…

Billionaire Peter Thiel gives ‘sociopathic’ response about humanities future

People on Reddit have been creeped out by how he answered a simple question about humanity and the future

^{Gerrard Kaonga (unilad)}

Yeah, an oracle for the masses is something very convenient.

Just remind me, who had the power - Alexander or his fortunetellers? Caesar or his fortunetellers? Or whether Delphi oracle ever managed to turn the religious part into power?

BTW - I understand how such ideas can be out of sincere desire to help humanity. Magic thinking is natural, and some perception of the world is natural, and evolution is just not fast enough for the technical developments we have.

And what I'd want in the future to account for that (sort of a panopticon, not because I'm an exhibitionist, but because you can't make a subset of society always tracked and visible without making everyone always tracked and visible ; and lack of banking privacy, for example, in Scandinavian countries doesn't seem to hurt them that much) might well be worse than what they want. A bit like Zamyatin's book.

It's just that "might" doesn't negate the fact that they are already doing a few very bad things, like genocide. Perhaps their mitigation is just not worth such sacrifices. Perhaps mine is better then.

That's why I feel like people need to be aware of this, and understand there are Republicans and Democrats taking Thiel's money.

It doesn't matter how he gets there, this is his ultimate goal. He would prefer the far right Nazi way, but if he has to hide behind a moderate Democrat he'll do that too.

Look at this shit.

Ro Kahnna is definitely setting himself up to run for president in 2028. Either that or possibly vice president to Gavin Newsome. Newsome also has taken Thiel money in the past.

Thiel's private Uranium mine just happens to be in the home state of Thomas Massie, the Republican who is partnering with Kahnna to take on the Trump Epstein files in a bipartisan tag team.

I'm glad they're exposing rich pedophiles, but don't give them fucking brownie points when it's clear they've been sitting on this shit the whole fucking time. The same with Vance going to Rupert Murdoch before all of this dropped.

They definitely could have exposed Trump before he even ran for president the second time, but they didn't bc this is just part of their evil bullshit plans. This is just a game to them, and the people who have been hurt and exploited mean nothing. Fuck these evil pieces of shit. All of them.

I'm surprised to see someone so supportive of Peter Thiel on Lemmy.

I feel like you're so lovestruck you've somehow confused Thiel and his money with the technology he's attached his name to, but I will loop you in on this hot take and very well kept secret: You can oppose Peter Thiel and the broligarchy trying to control the technology most of them played no role in creating, and not be opposed to technology.

Especially when you realize that the rush to this is bc Thiel just wants to attach his name to a very lackluster final product before anyone else can improve it out make it their own.

Technology is a great thing that can assist us, when it changes who we are it goes too far.

I love chocolate. I don't eat it for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Nuance is indeed a thing.

There's a difference between the want for convergence with tech for all, if they want

Vs.

We're going to transfer your consciousness into a virtual world and use you for biofuel while we, the powerful enjoy the wealth of your sacrifice.

lemmy.ca/post/34658048/1329082…

It’s called the dark enlightenment.

This article warns from way back in 2017 qz.com/1007144/the-neo-fascist…

They also want to use you for biofuel.

No, I’m not fucking kidding. These people are pure evil

“The trouble with the biodiesel solution is that no one would want to live in a city whose public transportation was fueled, even just partly, by the distilled remains of its late underclass. However, it helps us describe the problem we are trying to solve. Our goal, in short, is a humane alternative to genocide.”

newrepublic.com/article/183971…

vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/in…

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis…

American far-right political theorist and computer scientist

^{Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)}

Transhumanism—if it happens at all—is not happening anytime soon. Like, not for thousands of years if ever.

Listening to people talk about transhumanism today is like seeing people imagine flying cars in the 1950s. “Oh we’ve got this cool technology surely it means this wild extrapolation is right around the corner.”

Give me a break.

Not it. People are worried about what their brand of authoritarin capitalism will do with transhumnism.

Whenever you see technoligical skepticism, it's almost always about its effects on the working class as used by the ruling class of the time. If for example you opened up a new public research agency for AI (like NASA but NAIA) with the short term goal of developing open source AI and the long term promise to reduce the work week for all through AI productivity advancement, I think you'd get broad support.

Today however we hear private execs left front and centre salivating over the layoffs they'd be able to achieve thanks to AI, or over the new profit growth they're gonna achieve. Most people know they ain't getting any of that profit and would instead be stuck with the layoffs and inequality, among other negative effects. And history tells us this is a well founded concern.

They imagine themselves as the Titans from the Dune universe.

Is any of our current AI tech even making significant strides towards achieving this? I really don't think the current crop or billionaires will live to see this being viable even if they live another 100 years.

It's always fascinating to me how depictions of cyberpunk-style implants have evolved since the 80's.

The 80's stuff certainly has corporate spyware and such, but modern reimaginings has it an ever-present and practically undefeatable threat.

How can you beat it, after all? They make the implants.