Kremlin could be 'nervous' as angry Russians send messages to Putin amid Ukraine counterattack

lemme in@lemm.ee to World News@lemmy.world – 361 points –
Putin is enraged as Ukraine suddenly decides to invade Russia. Here's the strategy behind the audacious move
abc.net.au

Angry Russians displaced after Ukraine crossed the border and invaded the Kursk region last week have vented their frustrations online to President Vladimir Putin.

The criticisms represent an unusually public show of defiance in a country where any cracks at the leader or military can draw harsh punishments.

53

You are viewing a single comment

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.

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.

6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...