Oh yeah, im familiar, crossed is top tier.

Dropped off of my radar a while back, but I'll pick up again eventually

From your post history there are so many wins I’m surprised i lasted as long as i did.

I should really research before i try and take on the champ.

So you waste your time for the sake of it? I’d say something about not being able to reason someone out of a position they didnt use reason to get into in the first place but I guess its repetitive.

I stated exactly what my reasons are for engaging,

I think the word you are looking for is recursive, i could be wrong though.

You can spend your time as you want but the trolls do build their world by the responses of others. It makes them more real and let’s useless conversation bog down better ones. They are seeking answers they know they won’t get to make it seem like their world is more figured out for waving away other thoughts.

Genuine question, why would i care how they build their world ?

If they want to build a mental echochamber, who am i to deny them their delusions ?

The argument about bogging up otherwise useful conversations has merit though, I’ll consider that going forward.

Though, my side of the argument is still written as a good faith reply so there might be benefit in seeing actual replies, if only from one side...hmm..i'll think on this.

I dont know. I dont get any joy out of arguing the minutia of nonsense. It feels like it just fills my own head with it and doesnt make me more empathetic to understand that.

It's not really joy and i'm not really arguing the minutia expecting coherent replies, as i said it's interesting to me to try and understand different kinds of people, it helps me better communicate in situations where the other party is conversing in good faith.

I'm not really looking to build empathy for that either, perhaps some pity in some really tragic cases where you can see they are truly struggling, but those aren't usually trolls, just people struggling with people things.

A lot of the time the useful bits aren't in the bad faith nonsense itself but how it's structured, the way in which the "logical" pivots occur, the word choice or something else that isn't the actual content itself.

I get that it might not be like that for everyone.

Personally I am upset to find that someone doesnt want to talk but use me as a springboard for their own stuff but oh well.

I think we might have fundamentally different perspectives on what a conversation can be, but in this case I wasn't expecting genuine engagement, so I’m not upset or disappointed to find out there wasn't any.

I'm also not worried about them being upset by my approach, because bad-faith trolls deserve no worry.

TL;DR;

Your reply doesn't make sense because it seems you didn't understand what was said. (intentionally or unintentionally)

Ah, so you just picked a subject that was gun related but not actually related to the reply, to be angry about.

That could still be you missing the point accidentally i suppose.

OK, how about i lay out what was said, and you can see how your reply doesn't relate to it at all.

This is the exact moment the 2nd amendment was meant for. Now behold ! Literally 0 of the 2nd amendment guys will do anything about it…

Translation:

The 2nd amendment people are loud about protecting their right to guns, a large part of which is the need for said guns to be available in the case of a corrupt government arising that would require armed resistance, a "well regulated militia" , so to speak.

And yet here we are with the government shooting civilians in the streets and the 2nd amendment people are nowhere to be seen.

So, let check you reply for relevance against the original statement:

2nd amendment isn’t just for the 2nd amendment guys. Attacking gun rights when the left will likely need them in the coming years is short sighted.

Nobody was attacking gun rights.

To attempt satire by saying that a right wing facist advocating for gun rights, is also expected to advocate for my rights is weakness in the face of aggression.

Nobody mentioned fascists or requiring anyone to advocate for anyone else's rights.

The right doesn’t laugh at the satire, they laugh at you.

I'm not sure how this relates to either the original message you responded to, or your reply to it.

I will say however that a basic level of reading comprehension and good faith (the latter more than the former) would be required before i personally cared about someone's opinion of me, laughter included.

You undermine your own defense with others on the left.

As we've established above, this is also unrelated.

Also, "anybody who doesn't agree with me is a lefty" is a weak foundation for both conversation and understanding.

I'd assume the argument is the same kind of one made for sanctions, you restrict the interaction with the country to indicate you are displeased with some action(s) that government has taken.

It's not a good argument , mind you.

If you want to change conversations then indicate that that is what's happening , because the post you are replying to clearly stated the context in which that statement was made.

If you want to reply to that statement in an entirely different context and then don't mention that that is happening you're going to get confusion.

Reading a chart and understanding it are different things, a further different thing is understanding what it means in context.

This is a good book for learning the ins and outs of how to understanding statistical data in general.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics

It does come at it through the lens of intentionally deceptive practices but It's a good general introduction as well.

It's similar in that you presented a position that was not backed up by a reasonable interpretation of the data you also provided.

What you did was different, in that is was a brief misunderstanding of the wording rather than a fundamental misunderstanding of causation and correlation.

it didn't seem defensive as much as dismissive.

Honestly i could have just been reading tone in your response that wasn't there, i get that wrong more often than i would like, if so i apologise.

Ah, that tracks.

I'll wait and see if they reply, maybe it's something else.

Oh yeah, the whole article could be reductively summed up as

"DeepSeek and all the other LLM services are almost as bad as each other, but we think deepseek is worse....because the Chinese government are known for doing bad things".

The title is factual, if a little clickbaity.

Obviously keystrokes you submit to a website are submitted to the website.

This though, it's not technically accurate, a lot of forms and input are done client side and then the resulting information is parceled up and sent to the server.

The actual keystroke data isn't normally sent.

Though this article doesn't go in to what kind of keystroke data is sent, if it was something more than just which keys in which order then that's perhaps an indicator that it's actively being collected for a reason, rather than just incidentally.

If you want to get really paranoid about such things it's known that you can you can do interesting things with actual keystroke data.

Also, afaict none of the the non-chinese services have specified that they don't do this.

God-given? That's your go to?

Fuck the authorities because god says I can do what I like?

Also where is it you think the smokers section comes from?

I'm not saying what they are doing isn't bullshit, it very much is, but "who are they to tell me to do this new thing, I can continue to do this other thing they told me I can do, because I don't have to listen to them" is some Olympian level mental gymnastics

There shouldn’t be any of the Googled parts of Chrome in Edge, just as there aren’t any Googled parts of Chrome in stock Chromium.

There are at the very least googled parts of chromium in it though : https://github.com/ungoogled-software/ungoogled-chromium

Unless google have significantly changed the way they package and build chromium recently there are still google web service dependencies and i believe binary blobs (though they may have changed the closed source blob policy iirc)

Of course, you are now giving your data to Microsoft instead of Google, which isn’t really a win or a lose. If you’re not paying for the software, you’re either using FOSS, or the software is paid for by selling access to you and your computer.

Indeed