Need to let loose a primal scream without collecting footnotes first? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid: Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.
Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.
If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.
The post Xitter web has spawned soo many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)
Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.
(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this.)
Road rage victim 'speaks' via AI at his killer's sentencing [Archive]
I fucking can't right now.
Edit: 404Media article on the story that's much better
This is beyond horrifying:
I don't know to decide wether I should be glad this wasn't show to a jury, or sad we don't get an obvious mistrial setting some kind of precedent against this kind of demented ventriquolism act, indirectly asking for maximum sentencing through what should be completely inadmissible character testimony.
Does anyone here know how 'appeals on sentencing' vs 'appeals on verdicts', obviously judges should have some leeway, but do they have enough leeway to say (In court) that they were moved for example by what a spirit medium said or whatnot, is there some jurisprudence there?
I can only hope that the video played an insignificant role in the judges decision, and it was some deranged—post hoc—emotional—waxing 'poetic' moment for the judge.
Yuck.
Story goes he got an extra year of prison and the judge mentioned the ai testimony.
If I ever get murdered in the USA and my ai fake is not shouting about jury nullification you know it isnt the real me.
does anyone know who the company who did the AI video was? This reeks of PR.
I tried to find that out but it doesn't seem to be mentioned in any of the articles. However, searching for the names associated with it (wife, brother-in-law, and the third business partner) brings up "Kadima Ventures" from Arizona, which has these three names listed as management. However, information about that company beyond some weird mentions and a LinkedIn profile seems to be scarce (and the AZ business registry is either down right now or not accessible from where I am).
I looked again and found a 404 article on the whole story that's better and has more info than the one I linked before, though. I'm adding that to the original post.
Absolute chicanery.