Ragdoll_X

joined 1 year ago
[–] Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

4chan in a nutshell

[–] Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

Money is fake, scarcity is manufactured, capitalism is a scam

Unfortunately a lot of people have bought into the scam...

[–] Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago

I would like to propose some changes to that title:

Microsoft CEO's pay rises 63% to $79m, ~~despite~~ [because of] devastating year for layoffs: 2550 ~~jobs lost~~ [employees were fired by their greedy CEO] in 2024 [because he wanted more money]

[–] Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world 25 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Conservatives have already said that they want to inspect children's genitals, so it's only a matter of time until they start saying that they want to regularly inspect women's genitals as well to "protect unborn children" (read: control women and fulfill their sick fetish)

[–] Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Just don't ask them what they were doing between 1933 and 1945

[–] Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world 35 points 2 months ago

I remember when scientists were more focused on making AI models smaller and more efficient, and research on generative models was focused on making GANs as robust as possible with very little compute and data.

Now that big companies and rich investors saw the potential for profit in AI the paradigm has shifted to "throw more compute at the wall until something sticks", so it's not surprising it's affecting carbon emissions.

Besides that it's also annoying that most of the time they keep their AIs behind closed doors, and even in the few cases where the weights are released publicly these models are so big that they aren't usable for the vast majority of people, as sometimes even Kaggle can't handle them.

[–] Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world 58 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)
[–] Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

But I couldn’t find a credible source for the “showing children pornography” portion you mentioned

It's from one of the kid's testimony in the first link (it starts with "Now, when you first saw the suitcase, where was it in that room."), where he talks about how Michael showed him and his brother some porn mags. The first time he was hanging out with MJ while he was putting on makeup, and MJ picked up a suitcase with the porn mags and showed the kid one of the pictures. In the second occasion the kid can't recall if he or his brother brought up the suitcase or if MJ did, but he says that they were all looking at the magazines together for "30 minutes to an hour".

Regarding the books specifically, it's one of those elements that on their own could be interpreted as just MJ being kinda weird. We know the first book was a gift given the fan's inscription, and it's fairly reasonable to assume that the second one was a gift too. As the blog post points out the third book wasn't brought up in court and wasn't with the other two books, but it's still reasonable to assume that it belonged to MJ. To me the way the blog author tries to "soften" the book definitely points to some bias in their part:

The third book, that was confiscated in 1993 In Search of Young Beauty: A Venture Into Photographic Art (Charles Du Bois Hodges, 1964) which contains both boys and girls, mostly dressed, but some nude or semi-nude.

If we squint a bit we could just chalk these up to MJ possibly being a nudist or being a bit weird. I certainly think it's odd that he had books with pictures of nude children in them, and even liked one of them enough to inscribe his own message in it, but if only the books were brought up in court I certainly wouldn't think that's enough evidence to convict someone. But given the whole context and other elements of the accusations I'm not willing to give MJ that much benefit of the doubt.

[–] Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Definitely not the impression I got from everything I've read. The whole sleeping in the same bed with kids, keeping books with naked pictures of children, showing porn to kids (perhaps the most common method predators use to try to groom children), and the whole thing with setting up an alarm around his bedroom.

Keep in mind that a lot of the information I've seen was from a Wordpress blog bent on defending Jackson in any and every way possible, and yet I still think the case they make is not really convincing. The author speculates about what "true grooming" looks like, and why MJ's actions supposedly don't fit their personal expectations of grooming. They also try to justify him keeping those books with pictures of naked kids as if that was a normal thing to do.

Maybe if it was just one of these things it could still be justified as MJ just being weird. But it's all off these things, a clear pattern of behavior and accusations for which the simplest explanation is that MJ was indeed a predator. What I can say is that if these accusations were directed at some random dude down the road I definitely wouldn't want my kids going near him.

[–] Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world 36 points 3 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (8 children)

Looked up her name on Twitter to see what people were saying about this, that was a mistake 🙄

A lot of people seem to hate her for whatever reason, she was far from perfect, but all things considered I think she did fine as CEO and I never got the hate. It can't be easy to manage a company as big and complex as YouTube.

862
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.ml
 

Shameless plug of my playlists:


Edit: Yes the playlists are very much still incomplete and a work in progress. I promise I'll eventually add the recommendations yall made!

36
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.ml
 

~~idk someone posted this to a Discord server I'm part of and I thought it was funny~~

214
Amen 😇🙏 (t3d6.c16.e2-4.dev)
 
 

And who could forget Charlie Kirk's very normal human-sized face

 
 
260
A $9 investment (files.catbox.moe)
 
-10
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.ml
 

Somehow finished 12-0 on the latest challenge and the name of the banner did make me snicker

 
 

I wanted this meme but with a face so I edited in one of the faces from another comic.

2
download firefox (64.media.tumblr.com)
 
view more: next ›