DUMB IT DOWN-IMPEACHMENT

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

1 hour ago, Dan Warnick said:

Indeed!  If you go back and look you'll find that I responded with a Ha-ha emoticon at the time.  My comment he was commenting on was a bit tongue in cheek and he turned my logic on its head.  Touche', I say.  But you guys think remake is a bot?  Damn good one if it is.

I think remake it is a pretty high level Artificial Intelligence bot with 1 or 2 human handlers that can intervene if he / she feels the need.

(For reference, here is a year old thread with a glaringly obvious bot spewing nonsensical word salads in multiple comments.)

 

There have been at least 3 pretty distinct "personalities" in its comments.  So it would appear there is 1 bot and 2 human handlers.  Just guessing here.  The main "personalities" I have noticed are:

1) A fairly nonsensical commentor, with word salad of long, run-on sentences that don't make sense.  Similar to the nonsensical bot in the old thread I linked above ^

- clearly not human

 

2) An accusatory style commentor, unvariably accusing others of what it iself is doing.  AKA projection.

- could be human or Artificial Intelligence, not sure which

 

3) An intelligent, witty and humorous commentor.  This is the human "handler" personality that I wish would post here, and just ditch the bot and the "accuser" personality.

- clearly human

 

I'm open for feedback from @remake it on my guesses.

 

[remake it + 288]

2 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

The bot has repeatedly made me a target, which it does because of the ranking.  I have refused to get drawn in by the bot's defamatory postings about me. 

You make yourself a target and do what most nearly every poster here does and attack the messenger when they discover their arguments are unsound although you have gone out on a long limb to now consider yourself "defamed" (rather than famed as is your predeliction).

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

More crap from the Bot.  What a jerk.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

4 minutes ago, remake it said:

You make yourself a target and do what most nearly every poster here does and attack the messenger when they discover their arguments are unsound although you have gone out on a long limb to now consider yourself "defamed" (rather than famed as is your predeliction).

Personality #2, "the accuser".

[Guest]

LOL then block him Jan, I don't get it mate, and Remake attacks everyone doesn't he? I'm not sure he has agreed with anyone about any topic unless it's a vaguely pro China one. 

Ok fair enough, a Republican echo chamber then? Is that fair? You know what I mean though, most guys here kinda have the same views. 

[Rob Plant + 2,616]

2 minutes ago, DayTrader said:

Remake attacks everyone doesn't he? I'm not sure he has agreed with anyone about any topic unless it's a vaguely pro China one. 

I think Frankfurter and Marcin from time to time

I did get a purple cup from Remake It once for something I posted, I had to re read what I’d said to make sure I wasn’t going insane

[Guest]

Yeah coz Frankfurter is from China and Marcin tries to be fair like Papillon in defending China from constant abuse.

The purple cup would have been for an honest view from you of China, guaranteed, quite possibly the one Marcin praised, before accusing all of us of being bots.

Also, and Jan will hate this, but Remake in fairness doesn't come out with sweeping horseshit statements about whole populations, verging on racism, like FF does. 

Edited December 14, 2019 by Guest

[Rob Plant + 2,616]

Yep in fairness to Remake It that’s normally true.

 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

I'd say it's a tough guess and presumptuous to label a commenter as a bot, that is if you don't make outing bots a profession with all the assorted tools that profession probably employs.  (Bot what do I know!)

It's also unnecessarily insulting if one is not sure.  Imagine someone accusing you on a forum of being a bot.  How does one dig themselves out of that hole? 

Truth be told, some of my most enlightening moments in life came from speaking to certain personalities who......how to say it....sure didn't talk or think like I was used to having humans talk or think or act.  Some are just on a different plane.  AND, some of those people seem to have twins that speak and act the way they do because they are deranged and delusional.  Either way, I would not presume to label them a bot on a forum.  I'd just block them, which is truly effective.  I only still have one commenter on block, and it has made a difference in my forum experience and they don't seem to miss me either (but how would I know that, they're blocked?!).

Edited December 14, 2019 by Dan Warnick

[remake it + 288]

10 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

(but how would I know that, they're blocked?!).

Unimpeachable logic China.

[James Regan + 1,776]

2 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

More crap from the Bot.  What a jerk.

Bots are not new, This musical adventure will explain the Fembot and what goes on in the mind of a Bot, but remember "Imagination is only in the mind of the Imaginer"..... Frank Zappa

https://youtu.be/pTs5pkPFwl8

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 hour ago, Dan Warnick said:

I'd say it's a tough guess and presumptuous to label a commenter as a bot, that is if you don't make outing bots a profession with all the assorted tools that profession probably employs.  (Bot what do I know!)

It's also unnecessarily insulting if one is not sure.  Imagine someone accusing you on a forum of being a bot.  How does one dig themselves out of that hole? 

The solution to a real  person being labelled a bot is perfectly straightforward:  simply post under your own name, provide your address, and a reference from someone who can vouch for you, preferably with impeccable reputation, but if not, then well enough known that there can be no dispute.  That person can be a Mayor, a chief of police commander, a Governor, a President, Cabinet Minister, TV Reporter, corporate CEO. you get the idea.  If your reference is the head of Chinese Military Intelligence, counter-propaganda and Disinformation Section, then you just outed yourself.  Everybody else, you have established your bona fides. 

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

That person can be a Mayor, a chief of police commander, a Governor, a President, Cabinet Minister, TV Reporter, corporate CEO. you get the idea. 

LOL pure Jan.

Oh yeah, we all personally know a President or Mayor mate. Doesn't everyone? Talk about living in a different world hahahaha.

Plus, and no disrespect to OilPrice, but the suggestion I have to get some form of Presidential ID confirmation to post here is a little far fetched mate 🤣

Edited December 15, 2019 by Guest

[remake it + 288]

4 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

The solution to a real  person being labelled a bot is perfectly straightforward:  simply post under your own name, provide your address, and a reference from someone who can vouch for you, preferably with impeccable reputation, but if not, then well enough known that there can be no dispute.  That person can be a Mayor, a chief of police commander, a Governor, a President, Cabinet Minister, TV Reporter, corporate CEO. you get the idea.  If your reference is the head of Chinese Military Intelligence, counter-propaganda and Disinformation Section, then you just outed yourself.  Everybody else, you have established your bona fides. 

What an excellent idea Mr Van Eck as few could propose a simpler way to foster that glorious phenomenon of identity theft and turn you all into paupers overnight.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

13 minutes ago, remake it said:

What an excellent idea Mr Van Eck as few could propose a simpler way to foster that glorious phenomenon of identity theft and turn you all into paupers overnight.

And now the Bot is worried about someone stealing its identity!   Yes, folks, when you enter the Borg Cube, you get assimilated.  Resistance is futile.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

16 minutes ago, DayTrader said:

LOL pure Jan.

Oh yeah, we all personally know a President or Mayor mate. Doesn't everyone? Talk about living in a different world hahahaha.

Plus, and no disrespect to OilPrice, but the suggestion I have to get some form of Presidential ID confirmation to post here is a little far fetched mate 🤣

I just knew you specifically would appreciate the finer points of my logic.......

[remake it + 288]

7 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

And now the Bot is worried about someone stealing its identity!   Yes, folks, when you enter the Borg Cube, you get assimilated.  Resistance is futile.

Not to put to fine a a point on it but this is a century where nothing is necessarily as it might seem and the idea that you are in control of your identity and what it entails didn't even fit well into last century so please advise what you consider is nowadays immutable evidence and watch how quickly it can be discounted.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

21 minutes ago, remake it said:

Not to put to fine a a point on it but this is a century where nothing is necessarily as it might seem and the idea that you are in control of your identity and what it entails didn't even fit well into last century so please advise what you consider is nowadays immutable evidence and watch how quickly it can be discounted.

Fine.  Have George Bush vouch for you.  Then I'll call him up and ask if he did, or if you are some fraud bot.    Find out soon enough, chum.  Can't reach George?  OK, try Bill.  He's over in Westchester, we'll find out soon enough.  Don't bother calling Donald.  He won't take calls from the Chinese military.  End of your story. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 12/12/2019 at 6:49 AM, Jan van Eck said:

Getting past your movie-clip "meme" and the nice young man naked with his dog tags and neat hat,  you are incorrectly using the word "Liberals."  A "Liberal" is a person [in US politics, anyway] who has liberal ideals, which include respect for the person, a desire to eliminate poverty, a desire to advance education generally and intellectual thought specifically, and who ascribes to the first paragraph of the US Declaration of Independence.   

What I suspect you meant was a "Leftist," or what is occasionally referenced here on Oilprice as a member of the "International Left."  Those are people who are profoundly against individualism and any intellectual thought, ascribe to what can best be described as Communist ideology of subservience to an omniscient State  (but only with them in control of that State apparatus) and the crushing of individual freedoms.  In the USA you have this bizarre admixture of Leftist elitists, typified by the Clintonistas, where their ideas of a professional class of politicians from the International Left will run things literally forever, because offices such as the Presidency belong to Leftist Elitists by the doctrine of Droit du Roi.  And that is worlds apart from being a "Liberal."    Specifically, I would define myself as a Liberal, but assuredly I repudiate the doctrine of Antifa Leftists and their ideas of truculent conformity to their collectivist thinking.  Cheers. 

Unfortunately the classical liberal usage is just about dead in this day and age. People are just not taught political philosophy that is not leftist in this day and age. It is 90% leftist. 

[James Regan + 1,776]

5 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Unfortunately the classical liberal usage is just about dead in this day and age. People are just not taught political philosophy that is not leftist in this day and age. It is 90% leftist. 

The literal definition should apply to the political arena in which it is used now commonly for political persuasion, that being one is open to new behaviour or opinions and willing to discard traditional values. In a strictly political use liberal or Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on liberty, consent of the governed and equality before the law.

In the current political theatre the traditional Liberal doctrine has been twisted, as I see it a liberal would be the central political body or let's say sitting on the fence between parties, between the right and left. So as @Jan van Eck has stated indeed not just for OP but in general and in my view in the current US political arena "Liberal Politics" is indeed far left.

Liberals in most governments are neither left or right so let's now call them "centrals" in reality are stray seats, that being they can be easily manipulated or bought to sway the agenda of normally the ruling majority, particularly in a hung parliament.

Edited December 15, 2019 by James Regan

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

6 minutes ago, James Regan said:

in my view in the current US political arena Liberal Politics is indeed far left.

Yet words have meanings, and to distort the meanings is to debase the language.  For example, I would suggest that providing housing for the poor or poorer, what in England is called "council housing," e.g. built and paid for by the State with rents set at lower rates, is a "Liberal" policy, one that I would ascribe to.  Is that a "far Left" policy?  I don't see t.  A "far Left" policy is where some govt, presumably a State govt, decrees that fossil fuels are evil and a carbon tax of (pick your number) $2.00/gallon will now attach.  What that sort of tax does is hurt the working poor and the really poor, in that then they can no longer afford to buy fuel for heat, and to get to work  (especially the rural poor).  So, that is a hurtful, vindictive "Antifa-style" far-Left policy that is created by pseudo-Communist or faux-Communist elements in society.

See the difference?   No way a carbon tax could be considered "Liberal."  It is oppressive, abusive, and hurtful to the less fortunate.  It would be the total antithesis of "Liberal."

[James Regan + 1,776]

36 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

For example, I would suggest that providing housing for the poor or poorer, what in England is called "council housing," e.g. built and paid for by the State with rents set at lower rates, is a "Liberal" policy, one that I would ascribe to.  Is that a "far Left" policy?

This is debatable as the left plan to supply all with affordable housing seems like a perfect act but heavily abused by the poor, the said houses are then bought by law at very cheap rates by the said poor people and sold for profit or sub-rented while the said poor people have just upgraded by abusing a leftist policy. It seems like a utopian plan but the factor of human nature is always at play. Im not cherry picking your comment by the way but it merited a reply.

No-one in Britain needs to live on the street, very often its a choice, we have many tools at our disposal to get out of poverty.

Jan- After further reading your post, your not wrong and what you state is true regarding oppressive taxation- I think we are on the same page- but I haven't had a coffee yet....

Edited December 15, 2019 by James Regan

[remake it + 288]

49 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Yet words have meanings, and to distort the meanings is to debase the language.  For example, I would suggest that providing housing for the poor or poorer, what in England is called "council housing," e.g. built and paid for by the State with rents set at lower rates, is a "Liberal" policy, one that I would ascribe to.  Is that a "far Left" policy?  I don't see t.  A "far Left" policy is where some govt, presumably a State govt, decrees that fossil fuels are evil and a carbon tax of (pick your number) $2.00/gallon will now attach.  What that sort of tax does is hurt the working poor and the really poor, in that then they can no longer afford to buy fuel for heat, and to get to work  (especially the rural poor).  So, that is a hurtful, vindictive "Antifa-style" far-Left policy that is created by pseudo-Communist or faux-Communist elements in society.

See the difference?   No way a carbon tax could be considered "Liberal."  It is oppressive, abusive, and hurtful to the less fortunate.  It would be the total antithesis of "Liberal."

You appear to be blissfully unaware of the type and extent of taxation policies in other nations which have little impact on the working class as for example the duty on gas (called petrol) in the UK is well in excess of $2/gallon and then a VAT is added while the major problem with Western taxation is its singular inability to reach the most wealthy at the individual level or be avoided almost entirely by larger corporate entities.

Edited December 15, 2019 by remake it
but I haven't had a coffee yet

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 minute ago, remake it said:

You appear to be blissfully unaware of the type and extent of taxation policies in other nations which have little impact on the working class as for example the duty on gas (called petrol) in the UK is well in excess of $2/gallon and then a VAT is added while the major problem with Western taxation is its singular inability of it to reach the most wealthy at the individual level or be avoided almost entirely by larger corporate entities.

If this was from a real person instead of some AI Bot out of the Chinese military, I would actually write a reply to demonstrate the difference between US tax structures and impacts and those of the UK.  But since you are an AI pest, I decline to get sucked into that racket.  So move on, Bot.  Try another forum.

[remake it + 288]

Just now, Jan van Eck said:

If this was from a real person instead of some AI Bot out of the Chinese military, I would actually write a reply to demonstrate the difference between US tax structures and impacts and those of the UK.  But since you are an AI pest, I decline to get sucked into that racket.  So move on, Bot.  Try another forum.

There are several hundred nations and they have a myriad of differences in taxation policies so whatever you attempted would be somewhat meaningless as you simply have failed to distill the real problems of Westernized nations that systematically enhance income inequality through mechanisms that favor the wealthy both individually and corporately.