World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
It doesn't scare me. I just see no reason to trust LLMs after all the lies. There are plenty of legitimate sources that could be quoted.
A People’s Tragedy: The Russian Revolution: 1891-1924.
Orlando Figes, 1998
Go read it and tell me what you learn; happy?
Believe it or not, there is a huge gulf between "paste what a lying sentence construction machine says" and "require people to go to the right library."
But of course, that would require you to be arguing in good faith.
Lmao, we aren’t talking about some obscure, niche topic. You asked for a source and I gave you one…
Stop moving the goalposts; if anyone is arguing in bad faith it’s you my friend.
Google “russian revolution 1917” and read the first academic article you see. Your lack of research is not my responsibility…
I never moved the goalposts. If you can't figure out how to paste text from and then link to a couple of websites on the subject or even Wikipedia and thus rely on the thing that tells people to put glue on pizza, don't be surprised if you're criticized for it.
I’m perfectly capable of pasting a link to a website; I chose to use a source from a book I read in college and is sitting on a shelf at my house.
I’m not obligated to do a Google search for you.
And again, the LLM isn’t doing my research for me; it’s summarizing an event that I’m already aware of.
I'm afraid you don't understand how the burden of proof works. I'd give you an easy link to understand it, but someone told me recently, "I'm not obligated to do a Google search for you."
If you can’t be bothered to spend 5 mins looking something up then you’re welcome to believe whatever you want.
This isn’t a court case, we’re having a conversation in an Internet forum. What you’re calling a “burden of proof”, I’m choosing to call intellectual laziness.
Now that's some irony from someone who gets sentence-construction software to write posts on their behalf.
Are you incapable of grasping that the LLM wrote a total of like 3 sentences in a 3 paragraph comment?
And yea, the fact that you can’t seem to google 3 words and read a couple articles instead of being purposefully obtuse reeks of intellectual laziness.
Sorry, not sorry.
"I wasn't being lazy because I only used the lie machine a little bit."
Gotcha.
So you don’t have an actual argument, you’re just going to prop up the LLM strawman instead?
Is what I said wrong? Or are your feelings hurt because I used a tool to summarize something?
You are now flagrantly violating our incivility rule. If you wish to continue this discussion, do not violate it again. If you do not wish to continue it, that is fine.
Lmao, what authority do you hold?
So, calling out blatant logical fallacies is not being civil?
Ok buddy, you do you…
The authority of my being a moderator in this community.
This was the uncivil part:
Please read the rules in the sidebar. Specifically, rule 5.
And that’s different from this in what way?
-"I wasn't being lazy because I only used the lie machine a little bit."
Practice what you preach.
That would have been after you had called me lazy, would it not? I was pointing out that you were doing what you were calling me. It was demonstrative.
Do you think it is wise to continue down this hostile path with me? I think you would do best to walk away before you do something you shouldn't.
Your argument is intellectually lazy, I stand by what I said.
I’m only mirroring your attitude friend, ban me if you want. Plenty of other places I can take my opinion. You would think as a mod you would want to foster participation in the community, and not get hung up on something so petty.
You came at me aggressively off the bat; if you can’t admit that, then we aren’t ever going to see eye to eye.
Screenshotting this whole thread.
I don't plan on banning you. But I will delete any further posts that violate the civility rule.
I never even suggested I would ban you.