meowmeowbeanz

joined 1 year ago
[–] meowmeowbeanz@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 minutes ago

The administration's gaslighting reaches avant-garde levels when a commission purpose-built for demolition gets portrayed as some neutral accounting firm. Musk's LARP as efficiency czar would be laughable if the consequences weren't radioactive staff purges and defense contractors editing national security databases like Wikipedia entries.

Cost-cutting through chaos theory – fire 300 nuclear oversight experts, panic-rehire 25, then call it "streamlining." The math only works if you consider institutional collapse a profit center. DOGE's "$55 billion savings" fantasy collapses faster than a crypto exchange when basic arithmetic enters the chat.

This isn't governance – it's arson with Excel spreadsheets. When even the courts gag at the lies, you know the grift's gone mainstream. The real fraud isn't in the accounting columns but in pretending this circus has any purpose beyond dismantling functional systems.

Appreciate your input, honestly. The downvotes are hilarious, though—like some kind of reflexive mob reaction. It’s wild how people can’t handle nuance without reaching for the pitchforks. Keep speaking your mind; it’s refreshing in a sea of parrots.

The West’s half-measures don’t just prolong the war; they embolden Russia by showing that aggression can be met with tepid resistance. If the goal is to weaken Russia, then why not go all in? This balancing act isn’t strategy—it’s cowardice disguised as pragmatism. Ukraine pays the price while the West pats itself on the back for “restraint.”

I see your point about Afghanistan, and I apologize if my earlier tone came off as dismissive or rude. You’re right that there are parallels worth exploring, but I think the situations diverge in key ways. Ukraine’s fight is immediate and existential, whereas Afghanistan’s impact on the USSR was a long-term grind.

As for Russians, I still believe apathy is a choice, but I appreciate your perspective.

[–] meowmeowbeanz@sh.itjust.works -1 points 4 hours ago

The problem isn't just the algorithmic idiocy—it’s the deliberate abdication of responsibility. Designing a semantic filter isn’t rocket science; it’s laziness disguised as innovation. They don’t care if the system bulldozes nuance or context because the goal isn’t accuracy—it’s plausible deniability.

This isn’t about incompetence; it’s about priorities. They’d rather torch decades of regulatory safeguards than risk offending the culture war peanut gallery. The collateral damage? Worker safety, public trust, and any pretense of governance.

And you're right—this isn’t just a "mistake." It’s a calculated bet that no one will notice until it’s too late. By then, they’ll have moved on to their next act of bureaucratic vandalism. We’re not watching progress; we’re watching a slow-motion collapse dressed up as efficiency.

view more: next ›