MasterBlaster

You're not that far off. A combination of lack of effort + prompting the LLM to produce fiction produces, I think, a perfect combination of slop that is actively harmful to their worldview while being obviously fake about a third of the way through. Sometimes, I'll just switch tracks midway and insert communist propaganda into a book that, for example, is examining the worldwide influence of Antifa reptiles.

The short story it's based off is much shorter than you probably think. About 30K~ words. I'm sure it feels that way not because it was designed to be released all at once, but because the original story was not really written to support a HBO drama.

I engage in unethical behavior by effectively scamming people myself. I moralize about it often and don't feel like a great person but at the end of the day all I'm doing is a microcosm of what the worst of the worst people are doing, and the difference it makes for me is being able to live an average and comfortable existence.

FWIW, my scheme is using LLMs to pump out right-wing conspiracy slop for publishing on Amazon. Each book makes cents to dollars but you push enough stuff out (especially about relevant topics) and you get a steady stream of income. I prefer this to materially cheating someone out of a product because the buyer was just going to buy some other slop anyway.

incredible hexbear meme pull, incredibly specifically tailored to me

Yeah I don't know who any of these people are but she spoke to my experience as a manchild learning to cook in his twenties. There were lots of recipes where if I didn't have the staple already I'd be scared of it. The longer the list, the less likely I was to try it.

I'm a great cook now but I related to this exchange, and I really don't know who these people are so I can't defend any other of their takes.

I enjoy a bit of anarchist dunking but at the end of the day I see us as allies against a very imposing enemy so, personally, am not very interested in contesting anarchist theory. I will say though that your characterization of a largely ML community as accepting media narratives is probably the least charitable way you could have approached this disagreement. Then again, you were coming into an uncharitable take so I'm not holding it against you.

Ms Rachel is pretty much a gold standard imo. I'm a parent who is very anal about screen time, don't forbid it but it's extremely curated and controlled, and because I enjoy researching I've consumed a lot of toddler content.

She comes to play, dawg. She beats out all the other toddler slop (even sesame street) because the vast majority of her catalogue is shit you should be doing, just recorded on a screen. She's educated and employing methods that, if you pay attention and pick up, will genuinely help your kid along. There's a dozen 'Ms X' channels out there and if they're worth anything at all it's because they're almost a 1:1 copy of Ms Rachel's content. The rest are slop. Cocomelon is slop. Paw Patrol is slop. Seriously, none of them compare to the actual value of an hour of Ms Rachel.

I say all this because my read of her has been that she's an extremely professional and ethical person. I was watching her with my kid before she came out about Gaza and while I was chuffed in a very parasocial way, I wasn't surprised at all. Dedicated children's educators always carry a huge amount of empathy as they must teach it.

She's filling a niche in the new media toddler landscape that almost everyone else has decided to exploit with pure brainrotting slop. Got me typing up paragraphs with no point just because I want to express her sheer basedness. If Ms Rachel has no fans then I'm dead.

Yes this is a strong point I don't disagree with either. I look at it like this: Yes, parents should have an inherent, natural right to access to their children. No, parents should not have medical, total financial, or personal control over their kids until an arbitrary age. The secret sauce imo is properly socialized childcare; parents could be granted the benefit of the doubt that they'll do right because there's so many resources available to them to make it manageable, this also ensures a social standard of education & healthcare applied at the youngest possible age.

At that stage you could severely increase the legal penalties for neglecting your child and introduce more safety nets in way of developmental check-ins and home visits. I would support an outright 'parenting license' in a hypothetical society where childcare was completely socialized.

You can see car door handles in china - but at what cost?

as long as no one is telling them what to do, that is the most morally important aspect i've come to find

Indeed, the angry parades shall not be infringed upon

Just like how social production is distinct to regular production I think the hierarchy between parent and child is also unique and incomparable to more material connections like 'slave/master.' Parents have some inherent justification to the life experience they lord over their literal immobile infant; how this changes over time and between individuals, and with intent, is a conversation to have, but in general a well-intentioned parent deserves to inhabit the position in the hierarchy.