badnew

You are not arguing in good faith, instead you are arguing in an adversarial manner. You're not engaging with my points at all, instead you are relying on fallacious logic. I'm sorry that your upbringing has robbed you of a critical mind. Good luck.

> There isn't a picture of it because it doesn't exist?

> Or else why would you think Hamas still exist today even though basically all of Gaza's building is obliterated?

Ok, now put two and two together. You're close. I'll give you a hint:

https://stratcomcoe.org/pdfjs/?file=/publications/download/h...

"The strategic logic of human shields has two components. It is based on an awareness of Israel's desire to minimise collateral damage, and of Western public opinion's sensitivity towards civilian casualties. If the IDF uses lethal force and causes an increase in civilian casualties, Hamas can utilise that as a lawfare tool: it can accuse Israel of committing war crimes, which could result in the imposition of a wide array of sanctions.

Alternatively, if the IDF limits its use of military force in Gaza to avoid collateral damage, Hamas will be less susceptible to Israeli attacks, and thereby able to protect its assets while continuing to fight."

D-Day, June 6, 1944: The Battle for the Normandy Beaches by Stephen Ambrose

As I was reading the account of the assault on Omaha and Utah beaches, a lot of the stories reminded me of the opening scenes of Saving Private Ryan. Eventually the similarities got so great that I looked it up and, sure enough, the author of the script of SPR based those scenes on this book.

Every single vignette of horror which you see in that film really happened. If anything I think the film under-exaggerated the events unfortunately. I don't think I can watch that film the same way again.

Show me a picture of a single major Hamas military base that is not embedded in or under civilian infrastructure, just one, and I'll answer your question. Not a training camp, not an outpost, a major military base.

So there are drug smugglers, but the US isn't targeting them, they're targeting random boats, and the US is doing this for some reason which is apparently clear to OP but hasn't been made clear to us, and that somehow is the simplest explanation for what's going on, despite being entirely absurd?

Any country

"The protection to which civilian hospitals are entitled shall not cease unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy." - Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 19(1)

I think that illegally crossing a country's border, especially as part of a drug cartel's narcotics operations, tends to carry some risk

You are hopelessly lost, good luck

You, knowing absolutely nothing about the inner workings of the counter-narcotics operations, assert that there is no evidence that those people are drug runners, based only on ignorance of the facts, yet you are also apparently perfectly content to not provide any evidence to the contrary (that they are indeed systematically killing "random people"), despite the fact that such a claim is completely absurd, and you don't see any contradiction?

Engineers do not make hypotheses, we build solutions to problems.

This is false. A bridge is not built with approximations, it is built with a deep understanding of structural physics. Yes there are some unknowns, no it's not "educated guesses".

Which innocent people are you talking about exactly?

This is cope and fundamentally misrepresents engineering. Engineers deal with a problem space that is probabilistic (although they try to model it as best as they can), but design solutions in a deterministic space. With LLMs the solution space itself is non-deterministic.

Idk, supporting literal terrorism is pretty trendy these days

It's not engineering if you're just guessing as to what is degrading the performance and what might improve it.

Except that LLMs are only being trained to do things that humans can do, not things that humans cannot do.

I have heard a lot of claims like this, where we cannot imagine the benefits of AI because the work will look so different to how it is now, but I have yet to see that actually demonstrated anywhere.

Snapchat is to photography as passing notes in class is to literature

I don't think exercising your rights should imply anything