This has also been happening in Australia with Sky News Australia.
It's main audience is now in the US, yet its drift into deranged right-wing content has poisoned Australian politics.
Hmm. Very interesting. Implications for public opinion?
Transnational public opinion is sometimes celebrated in the deliberative literature. But perhaps things aren't always as they seem? Some troubling questions here.
I wonder if the former Air NZ CEO who is now Prime Minister is able to join the dots between his subservience to the tangerine fascist and the upward spiralling impacts on Aotearoa.
Where is our rail network? Oh, thats right, we dont have one anymore...
www.rnz.co.nz/news/busines...
NEWS: The Trump administration confirmed it bombed a girlβs school in Iran.
It's one of the most devastating military errors in decades.
Trump lied about it. Pete Hegseth gutted the office preventing civilian casualties.
175 are dead. Most were kids. Hegseth should be fired.
Looking at the homepage of all of our news organisations, you'd be excused to think that war is happening on a different planet, and its effects are limited to costly/inconvenient supply chain disruptions. It's like we're not living through history. (See also: muted, cowardly coverage of Gaza.)
In todayβs NZ Herald
Electoral loss is not a consequence, itβs a paid vacation for these people. They destroy everything and go to the oppositional benches for a break and come back and do more damage. Workers have fewer rights now. Beneficiaries have more hardship. Everything is more expensive.
Surely not again?
Pretty damning of all parties.
The Iranian regime installs a likely incapacitated man as supreme leader to signal continuity and lock in the continuation of its brutal rule.
However, even in these circumstances, its strategy and war aims are clearer than Trump's.
Some help with the second part:
Australia should remember that it is itself an independent and free country. It doesn't need to accept the CCP's opinion.
$1.73 bn and 430,000 people.
If a minister can't be expected to do anything (beyond unquestioningly accepting departmental advice) to satisfy himself of the morality or legality of a policy of this scale, how big does something actually have to be to warrant scrutiny from a minister? π€
The risk in relation to the law is particularly alarming. If a judge's decision is informed by legal scholarship or cases that were LLM hallucinations (and which he failed to identify as such), that decision is still binding.
The path from slop to case law that binds lower courts is scarily short.
Alas, we can't just reboot the whole world.
AI slop is almost certainly finding its way, through less responsible practitioners, into academic publications and case law.
Personally, I think getting AI to write articles shows a great disrespect for your readers.
If you can't be bothered to put the time into writing it, why do think others should spend their precious time reading it?
It's a strange world we live in. I suppose it fits well with the idea that universites are businesses selling products - the piece of paper you get at the end matters more than whether you learnt anything.
It is reasonable to say that a minister shouldn't be held to account for corrupt actions carried out by individual public servants. This case, however, is very different - it was a significant policy that involved large sums of money and affected many people.
By the NACC's logic, it seems the buck stops with the lowest person who can be identified in the decision hierarchy. Those above can just say they trusted the advice they were given and wash their hands of any responsibility to ask questions or understand the law.
The King can do no wrong - that is why we have responsible ministers, who accept accountability for the actions of the Crown based on their advice and carried out within their portfolios.
Apparently, we are now to accept that a minister can do no wrong.
"If liberty means anything at all, it means ...." Oh I give up. Still, I expect Toby Young and the FSU will be up in arms about this, ditto the free speech warriors at the Daily Telegraph. What's that you say? Really?
Haven't you heard that the purpose of schools essays, academic research papers, and official reports is simply for them to be produced for their own sake?
They can be produced by AI and then assessed by AI.
No human needs to read or write them, let alone build knowledge or apply critical thinking!
βwhat Iβm claiming here is that LLMs produce excellent literature reviewsβ
I was today years old when I learned that apparently the function of a literature review is the written output, not doing the reading yourself so you do the learning and then generate the insights yourself.
I think this government really do drink their own Koolaid, and genuinely believe that their projects just don't face the same kinds of risks as previous governments, because they are just inherently Better Managers.
One might even call it βpredatory.β Well, I would: www.foreignaffairs.com/united-state...
Culture war-driven, vibes-based, global-far-right-power-grab-directed politics result in yuuuuge government competency-deficits that are incredibly hard to recover from. The US is the tragic example writ large across the planet; our local lot are more embarrassing simply for being ours.
The Australian self-image, at least of the broad majority, invests a lot in the larrikin of old, but the reality (as pointed out elsewhere) is that Australians are remarkably tolerant toward state coercion when visited on people we disapprove of.
the Forever Wars are still underused for tragicomedy, honestly, but 'Arabic interpreter gets deployed to Afghanistan' is a good starting premise
What!?! How did the project with a lower budget than the other project that went overbudget already go overbudget??!
A reminder that when Christian Zionists and Christian Nationalists in the West talk about Christians, they are not talking about the Christians of the same holy land that Jesus himself came from. They don't give a shit about us.
TΓ’i-oΓ’n sΔ« TΓ’i-oΓ’n.
MΜ sΔ« 'Tiong-hΓ΄a TΓ’i-pak'. MΜ sΔ« Tiong-kok Γͺ chiΜt-pΕΝ-hΕ«n.
Γ-chiu eng-kai Δ-kΓ¬--tit i ka-kΔ« sΔ« toΜk-liΜp kah chΕ«-iΓ» Γͺ kok-ka. MΜ-biΓ‘n chiap-siΕ« Tiong-kok KiΕng-sΓ‘n-tΓ³ng Γͺ Γ¬-kiΓ n.
