- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Decatur
| Favorite team: | LSU  |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 32266 |
| Registered on: | 3/10/2007 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: Trump says we're going to take US Navy and escort tankers through the strait at our cost
Posted by Decatur on 3/3/26 at 3:22 pm to HubbaBubba
He’s also full of shite.
6
“U.S. to provide insurance to Gulf ship, will escort tankers through Hormuz”
The escort idea has already been tossed as I understand. The insurance plan seems like pie in the sky right now.
The escort idea has already been tossed as I understand. The insurance plan seems like pie in the sky right now.
re: The French are coming to protect the strait of Hormuz
Posted by Decatur on 3/3/26 at 2:34 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
the French aircraft carrier FS Charles de Gaulle (R91) will be sent to the eastern Mediterranean Sea
Well, at least to the eastern Mediterranean.
re: Just voted against John Cornyn
Posted by Decatur on 3/3/26 at 10:41 am to ABearsFanNMS
I am forever hopeful.
re: How long before we send in the ground troops?
Posted by Decatur on 3/3/26 at 9:59 am to StrongOffer
quote:
He just wants an Iranian to take the reins who will be obedient to the US. Same thing he did in Venezuela.
I don’t know if the Iranians will be just as willing to let Trump control their oil.
re: Alex Jones says he was a professional Voice actor before being 'blackballed'
Posted by Decatur on 3/3/26 at 8:54 am to Godzilla jr
Yep my first introduction to him.
Do you think that Paxton will perform better against a Democrat should he win the primary?
re: Ralph Abraham named Chair of Letlow campaign
Posted by Decatur on 3/2/26 at 5:29 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
The second part was that after her election to the Senate, if she won, he'd at some point put in her in the position of the President of a university or one of the university boards, then try to insert himself in as her replacement in the U.S. Senate.
This part doesn’t make much sense to me. Why would she then leave the Senate? How exactly would Landry then appoint himself? Seems pretty far fetched.
Oops misread as John Bolton
Pretty weak comeback after getting bodied by Omar.
re: Bring Us Your Memes: 2024 Election Day and Beyond
Posted by Decatur on 3/2/26 at 10:59 am to indianswim
Anthropic: Statement on our discussions with the Department of War
Posted by Decatur on 2/26/26 at 5:14 pm
quote:
Anthropic understands that the Department of War, not private companies, makes military decisions. We have never raised objections to particular military operations nor attempted to limit use of our technology in an ad hoc manner.
However, in a narrow set of cases, we believe AI can undermine, rather than defend, democratic values. Some uses are also simply outside the bounds of what today’s technology can safely and reliably do. Two such use cases have never been included in our contracts with the Department of War, and we believe they should not be included now:
Mass domestic surveillance. We support the use of AI for lawful foreign intelligence and counterintelligence missions. But using these systems for mass domestic surveillance is incompatible with democratic values. AI-driven mass surveillance presents serious, novel risks to our fundamental liberties. To the extent that such surveillance is currently legal, this is only because the law has not yet caught up with the rapidly growing capabilities of AI. For example, under current law, the government can purchase detailed records of Americans’ movements, web browsing, and associations from public sources without obtaining a warrant, a practice the Intelligence Community has acknowledged raises privacy concerns and that has generated bipartisan opposition in Congress. Powerful AI makes it possible to assemble this scattered, individually innocuous data into a comprehensive picture of any person’s life—automatically and at massive scale.
Fully autonomous weapons. Partially autonomous weapons, like those used today in Ukraine, are vital to the defense of democracy. Even fully autonomous weapons (those that take humans out of the loop entirely and automate selecting and engaging targets) may prove critical for our national defense. But today, frontier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons. We will not knowingly provide a product that puts America’s warfighters and civilians at risk. We have offered to work directly with the Department of War on R&D to improve the reliability of these systems, but they have not accepted this offer. In addition, without proper oversight, fully autonomous weapons cannot be relied upon to exercise the critical judgment that our highly trained, professional troops exhibit every day. They need to be deployed with proper guardrails, which don’t exist today.
To our knowledge, these two exceptions have not been a barrier to accelerating the adoption and use of our models within our armed forces to date.
The Department of War has stated they will only contract with AI companies who accede to “any lawful use” and remove safeguards in the cases mentioned above. They have threatened to remove us from their systems if we maintain these safeguards; they have also threatened to designate us a “supply chain risk”—a label reserved for US adversaries, never before applied to an American company—and to invoke the Defense Production Act to force the safeguards’ removal. These latter two threats are inherently contradictory: one labels us a security risk; the other labels Claude as essential to national security.
Regardless, these threats do not change our position: we cannot in good conscience accede to their request.
LINK
quote:
Jasmine Crockett is getting the Nomination.
If this a strongly held belief there could be money for you to make in the predictions markets.
quote:
Our intelligence said no.
Link?
quote:
WASHINGTON — President Trump agreed on Monday to certify again that Iran is complying with an international nuclear agreement that he has strongly criticized, but only after hours of arguing with his top national security advisers, briefly upending a planned announcement as a legal deadline loomed.
Mr. Trump has repeatedly condemned the deal brokered by President Barack Obama as a dangerous capitulation to Iran, but six months into his presidency he has not abandoned it. The decision on Monday was the second time his administration certified Iran’s compliance, and aides said a frustrated Mr. Trump had told his security team that he would not keep doing so indefinitely.
LINK
quote:
I am issuing the JCPA to show that Obama and you were retards for thinking it would stop Iran.
They were complying before we withdrew, yes?
So we’re doing to this to hold Iran to an agreement that we are no longer a party to?
quote:
You’re making a causation argument,
Yes!
quote:
Saying “we’re here because Trump withdrew” doesn’t remove Iran’s agency in what followed.
They definitely have agency. The regime wants to survive.
quote:
But it doesn’t make Iran’s violations inevitable
I believe it did.
quote:
You are acting like the Obama deal was only between the USA and Iran.
The US was the indispensable party. The deal died when Trump withdrew.
quote:
So technically the deal is still in place which is further proof that Iran cannot be trusted.
Worthless paper after the US withdrew.
quote:
You’re shifting from whether violations occurred to why they occurred.
I never said they didn’t start violating after Trump withdrew. My argument is we’re in this position right now due to Trump’s decisions. We had a working inspection regime before he trashed the agreement.
Sure you can still argue they have legal obligations under the agreement but that doesn’t change the reality of the US withdrawal coupled with maximum pressure sanctions and the subsequent effect on Iran’s actions. Israel shares some of the blame with the U.S. here too.
I want what yall are smoking.
Popular
17
