solid_fuel

Abolishing a criminal organization and jailing the unqualified thugs who have spent the last 2 years terrorizing and murdering citizens in the street does not mean "quit enforcing immigration".

ICE was created in 2002 as part of the notorious Homeland Security Act. Do you think immigration law was just... not enforced before that?

Hint: Immigration law was previously handled by an agency called the Immigration and Naturalization Service, with customs enforcement being handled by US Customs. ICE has shown complete disregard for the Constitution, a common issue with the agencies created by the Homeland Security Act.

Dismantling ICE does not mean stopping border enforcement. It means decentralizing that power and devolving immigration enforcement to agencies better equipped to handle it while protecting the rights of American Citizens.

If you go back and read the comment you are responding to, you will see this text:

> I assure you, it is perfectly possible to enforce border and immigration policies without engaging in wanton cruelty or violations of civil rights.

The false equivalence, then, is right here:

> If there’s no immigration enforcement, that’s functionally equivalent to having open borders.

Where you again just skip over the enumerated criticisms and pretend that all border enforcement must be done in such an aggressive and violent manner without regard for constitutionally guaranteed rights.

If you don't want to acknowledge the difference between "enforce immigration law in a civil and reasonable manner" and "terrorize neighborhoods and execute citizens to make a point", then I can't help you.

> The Minnesota 15 are not accused of ordinary protest. The article gave no evidence that these people hadn't committed any crimes it just went on and on about investigative capabilities of HSI.

Actually, the way the criminal justice system works here in America is that you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. It's not the job of the newspaper to exonerate the victims of government overreach.

Do you think the only way to enforce civil infractions, like immigration violations, is by raiding an apartment building by helicopter at 1 AM?

Do you think the appropriate way to handle people SUSPECTED of having an expired visa is by throwing them in an overseas prison without trial?

Do you think it's RIGHT to throw pregnant women into a prison camp and deny them medical care, just because something was filled out wrong on their immigration paperwork?

I assure you, it is perfectly possible to enforce border and immigration policies without engaging in wanton cruelty or violations of civil rights.

Here's some advice for future debates: drop the petty whataboutisms, quit making strawmen to attack, and address the actual criticisms.

Literally none of them, but it won't matter to the "both sides" types or the right wingers because it's about their feelings not about the facts of what actually happened during COVID or how many people the TEMPORARY restrictions saved.

>> The DoJ is literally run by trump’s personal lawyer. <<

> As to the political makeup at DOJ, information about political donations at federal agencies is public.

I'm sure many of the rank-and-file at the DOJ DO donate to democrats these days, after all the republican party has demonstrated rank criminality across the last ~ 15 years, which is only getting worse. Anyone at the DOJ who still cares about criminal justice and the rule of law is going to likely support the only remaining party that isn't bending the knee to criminals and con men.

It still doesn't change my original criticism - that the DOJ is run by Trump's personal lawyer - and it doesn't make your whataboutism suddenly relevant.

> And it's not because nobody before Trump ever did anything rising to the level of paying off a porn star and calling it "legal expenses." It's because we have had a taboo against prosecuting politicians.

Are you somehow under the impression that is the actual complaint about illegal behavior and weaponization of the government? You won't be able to contribute meaningfully to this discussion if you insist on pretending that the hush money payment is the limit of the criminality being discussed here.

Please go do some research into the recent actions of the DoJ before trying to defend them like this, irrelevant whataboutisms will not move this conversation forward.

As expected, you ignore the actual complaint and just draw specious comparisons, making unsubstantiated claims that "most" of the people at the DoJ are totally democrats, trust me dude.

I'll just leave this here, since this was the actual complaint: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Blanche

After the crap they pulled in the latest Brazilian election, there is no reason to give Facebook the benefit of the doubt. They are obviously and intentionally trying to use their extreme influence over online communities to influence elections.

Watch for more fuckery during the current US election season.

The DoJ is literally run by trump’s personal lawyer. You can play this game where you pretend it’s all the same but the rest of us have eyes too.

Wow, maybe the republicans should have considered the consequences before letting the Trump administration weaponize the DOJ.

They didn’t, and they own the consequences.

Weird to get all bent out of shape about actual, research backed science in a Scientific American article just because your gut feeling says otherwise.

I'm the opposite - usually good at skimming, close reading takes more effort. I find LLM generated text is basically unintelligible for both.

It you don’t think national secrets should be sold on ebay to personally enrich whoever happens to hold office, good news: we are in the middle of election season and now is a great time to do something about it.

Let this serve as a reminder to vote! Removing this dementia addled criminal and his supporters from power is the patriotic thing to do if you care about this country and its future.

> But the way it is going, if AI is writing all the code and no human needs to read it anymore, does it really need to be maintainable?

It's more important than ever, because code is just a way of expressing intent. If the code becomes overly complex, it de-coheres, and intent is lost across the system you are building.

This is why vibe coded projects turn into slop and eventually stop iterating: at some point that actual intent is too vague and contradictory because of the many layers of code that have been added.

> For me, I can't read books at all, because I forget what was said two paragraphs before. I bet people that are good at skimming text have less problems with AI generated text.

Actually LLM generated text is almost impossible to skim. It's too flowery and the actual meaning is spread too thinly across the text, which means that you can't just read the "important" sentences of a paragraph.

For those who can't view the link due to the continuing degradation of the twitter UX, this is just the world's richest man making vague threats to our elected representatives about "coming after the ones who pull the strings" over a recent report that democrats in congress intend to hold him accountable for his crimes at Doge and elsewhere.

All I have to say is: If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

He should have worried about consequences when he was busy illegally dismantling USAID and terrorizing our civil servants.

Only in the context of something like RAG - there, you can attach provenance information to data included in the prompt.

With training data, however, no such annotation is possible.

I would rather keep things on postgres but everything wanting its own postgres container is really annoying. Postgres already has support for multiple databases, users, and access controls. I would personally prefer to just set up one postgres instance with proper backups and have everything run against that, unfortunately some self-hosting projects have fairly poor support for that.

Well yes, but that's the point entirely - you can easily put a binary into a docker container, or a jail, or on a VM. But when something is shipped as 5 different docker containers it is MUCH harder to extract it into something you can run without docker or in a different configuration (like sharing a postgres instance between multiple applications).

One distribution method is flexible and can be deployed however you want, the other prescribes solutions and makes any customization difficult.

You might not like hearing it, but it is true.

Code has never been the bottleneck for a skilled engineer, and if you value high quality then you need to spend a lot of time reading over the slop LLMs produce to turn it into something hardened and reliable. So, for a skilled engineer, LLMs have a very marginal benefit in terms of delivery speed.

This is backed up by LLM productivity studies.

> Here the data model is a direct copy, down to the terminology.

That’s not surprising to me - they designed and built it using their LLMs, of course it’s duplicating prior work. That’s essentially the core of what LLMs do, after all.

What a silly response. The parent post is factual, your GP post is not.

There, now we have all brought the same amount of rigor to this discussion.

I’ll also point out that everyone sees Russia struggling in this war that they’re “definitely winning”. The baseless assertions may have been intimidating at the start of the war but we’re years into it now and Ukraine is still standing.

> Investigators also sought permission to use an invasive surveillance tool called a cell-site simulator against journalist Georgia Fort and a Minnesota state Senate candidate.

There, I fixed it for you. Now you can freely read and engage with the content of the article.

> Autonomous AI Agents are failing in enterprise environments because standard Vector Databases (Pinecone, Milvus) act as static filing cabinets. They rely on discrete Euclidean metrics like Cosine Similarity, which blindly retrieve contradictory information (hallucinations)

Hallucinations are a result of the next token selection process, not simply caused by bad RAG. In effect, all LLM generated content is a hallucination, sometimes the hallucinations are useful.

Eliminating “bad” data from your RAG database is not going to fix hallucinations.

Dreams are one thing. People here are tired of fantasies and wishful thinking. Looking at the problem here - Adobe treating customers like crap and exploiting them - most of us realize that the solution is simply regulation. Leveraging the power of society and government to force the company to behave properly.

Gesturing at LLMs and going “this and the free market will fix it” is laughably naive, especially in 2026. That is why people are reacting harshly. This is a problem that was created by the free market, it’s not magically going to be fixed by some new product.

The New York times publishing an article you don’t like is not “communist infiltration”. In this country, we have a right to free speech, including free press.

Somehow I am not surprised to see you repeating the red scare here. This attitude is anti-intellectual and destructive.

> We need a more invective word than 'pseudo-intellectual.'

Here's one: 'AI-Bro'

Criticizing a subset is not the same as criticizing the whole set. You know this. Pretending otherwise is a waste of everyone’s time.

All this requires is basic reading comprehension and a willingness to not read into statements things that weren’t stated.