• 0 Posts
  • 97 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

help-circle







  • Firstly they never said that they would turn him to the US.

    The Taliban government in Afghanistan offered to present Osama bin Laden for a trial long before the attacks of September 11, 2001, but the US government showed no interest, according to a senior aide to the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar.

    Wakil Ahmad Muttawakil, Taliban’s last foreign minister, told Al Jazeera in an exclusive interview that his government had made several proposals to the United States to present the al-Qaeda leader, considered the mastermind of the 2001 attacks, for trial for his involvement in plots targeting US facilities during the 1990s.

    Robert Grenier, the CIA station chief in Pakistan at the time of 9/11, confirmed that such proposals had been made to US officials.

    Grenier said the US considered the offers to bring in Bin Laden to trial a “ploy”.

    Subsequent to the 1998 US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, as US pressure grew, the Taliban insisted on a procedure under the supervision of OIC because it considered it a “neutral international organisation”.

    The OIC is a Saudi Arabia-based organisation representing 56 Muslim nations. Al Jazeera contacted the OIC, but nobody was available for comment.

    Muttawakil, who now lives in Kabul and advises an Islamic educational foundation, reportedly tried to negotiate a ceasefire in the days after the US launched operations in the country in 2001 by seeking to convince Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader, to part ways with bin Laden.

    He was taken into US custody in the notorious Bagram prison early in 2002. After months of detention, he was released under house arrest in Kandahar and then moved to Kabul.

    So hey, in fairness, maybe the guy we illegally tortured for years at Bagram may have stretched the truth. But it appears the US CIA station chief simply didn’t trust the Taliban in the run up to 9/11 and decided it wasn’t worth the trouble to negotiate.


  • Islamic terrorism has almost exclusively been the domain of Wahhabists like Al-Queada and Islamic State

    And, you know… some other guys…

    Also, uh… some people closer to home

    And lest they be forgotten

    There’s an old joke about the Anti-American Terrorist and the Pro-American Freedom Fighter being the same dude pointed in different directions. The Taliban, being once again in control of the Afghani government, isn’t going to see itself as a “terrorist organization” any more than the Philadelphia PD bombing your house would.

    The Taliban is currently fighting Islamic State Khorasan Province, which is largely constituted of former collaborators of the coalition government.

    The Moderate Rebels! Easy to forget that ISIS used to be an ally of

    • Israel
    • Syria
    • Turkey
    • Saudi Arabia
    • Qatar
    • United States

    By turns. I’m sure that, while folks on CNN clutch their pearls and cry to the heavens about the horrors perpetuated by the Taliban on women, LGBTQ groups, minority religions, cough drug traffickers cough, and American business interests in the region, we’re going to hear very little about the politics of this particular incarnation of the Islamic State.


  • There was an abstract conceptual theory of system agnostic game add-ons. It isn’t… completely inconceivable.

    You could work with a relatively prolific engine, like Unreal, and set up a standard character model dummy with designated hard points for attaching accessories and certain default movements. Then any accessory could simply scale to the environment - Master Chef could swing a keyblade while the Elden Ring guy gets to wear Iron Man armor, because these are all “human” models with well-defined structures that could map to the associated equipment. The blockchain becomes a universal registry for these assets that a platform can read from to render the art.

    The problem is that nobody ever actually implemented this universal protocol. They all just ran off making jpegs of weird animals and running fake auctions to create the illusion of a secondary market. You had zetabytes of data being processed so some Baked Alaskahole could claim his Kumming Koala was worth $40M.

    I don’t even strictly begrudge “the blockchain” as an idea for licensing and data storage (just please don’t ask me to think about who is generating the licenses or storing the data). But it was all vaporware. None of it was anywhere close to being created, much less delivered. People were throwing billions with a b of dollars at entirely empty promises.




  • In fact it would probably really benefit Democrats as people who might not go to vote otherwise might go vote green as their top pick and then vote Democrat as their second pick. If the Green candidate won, that’s someone they could make some compromises with

    This is a naive understand of how the Democratic Party wants to function.



  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlon our way to fascism
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    on lemmy.ml, anyone that fails the leftist purity test is a liberal and all liberals are fascists

    Liberals: “You can’t just call everyone a fascist every time you disagree with a policy, it isn’t civil.”

    Also Liberals: “My political opponents are fascist and any third party vote is a vote for fascism and if you don’t vote you’re supporting fascism and if you argue with me on foreign policy or debt relief or you hurt my election chances in any way, then you’re going to let a fascist back into the White House.”




  • The turing test is an absolutely garbage metric for identifying if a computer iteration qualifies as human

    It’s a useful metric because it addresses the primary means by which humanity is evaluated (via evaluation by other humans). You can set up a synthetic test to determine if a response is computer generated. But this won’t measure behaviors as evaluated by humans. If the results diverge, it will be due to some number of characteristics that humans aren’t reliably picking up on.

    The original name for the Turing Test was “The Imitation Game”. And the fact that computers could pass the test as early as the 1960s only proves that humans (in this particular case, humans with very low exposure to computer behaviors) can be reliably deceived. But the consequence of this game iterating out over sixty years of practice is a hyper-sensitivity to computer output, such that end users will mistake humans for computers instead of the other way around.

    entirely dependent on the whims of the individuals that make up the test group

    Not whims, but learned observational patterns. This is what ultimately separates people from machines - patterns of behavior. If a computer and a human exhibit the exact same behavioral pattern, there’s no way to distinguish one from the other.