Negative.

I am a meat popsicle.

  • 5 Posts
  • 93 Comments
Joined 18 days ago
cake
Cake day: December 28th, 2025

help-circle



  • Yup. You definitely have no idea how treaties or international relations work.

    I get that it’s scary that the US is doing it, but this is far from the first time world leaders have blustered about wanting territory that wasn’t theirs.

    The international community didn’t support preemptive action even when 50,000 troops were massed on Ukrainian borders, they’re not going to do it when a single US combat asset hasn’t moved towards Greenland yet, and not a single policy decision has been enacted.

    Edit- don’t get me wrong, if we start blockading Greenland, massing naval and amphibious forces, or building up ground units on the base in Greenland, then absolutely bomb the shit out of them, but the international community will never support action before that. It’s ludicrous to think they would.




  • But it isn’t the same argument.

    When DJs sample, they choose the samples, choose the pitch and playback speed, and choose where and when to put the sample in their songs.

    There is no human intentionality in AI-created music. No one decided what the song should sound like, it’s a mash of what an algorithm calculates is the most predictable next sound based on its prompt, and it calculates what’s next by illegally using the intellectual properties of real humans.

    Whoever used this argument with you isn’t arguing in good faith.

    Edit - I didn’t even answer the overarching question. You’ll find, in almost all cases, that it isn’t the same argument because one or more things that factor into the decision will have changed. Very rarely is a situation entirely static, and if some variables have changed, then the entire argument must be reconsidered.