Fedegenerate

The answer is found in capitalism. Why are gamers, who have continually been fucked by capitalism, so blind at seeing the obvious. '80s game crash: capitalism. Day one DLC: capitalism. Micro transactions: capitalism. All the hardware being hoovered up, so software costs more at every level, increasing prices for both hardware and software: capitalism.

Blood over Bright Haven. A book that, among other things, is about discovering how to be a good ally.

You don’t understand, I need all the help I can get!!!

Which is quite literally everything. At the very, very, least goods and services are distributed via oil power somewhere in the chain.

I don’t think Spec ops is spoilers to reveal you’re a bad guy, not in 2026: you play the US, in the Gulf. You play the US doing US imperialism, it doesn’t hide that from you. It’s just later in the game it confronts you with what that really means.

Braid absolutely, but it’s 17yo at this point, any reasonable spoiler policy* has worn off. Meets the criteria, gets you all empathetic for the little shit, Tim, then makes you question it all. I think a first play through is impactful even knowing he’s a villain… It’s not that he’s a villain that is cool, it’s how you find out he’s a villain.

*Except for Outer Wilds the spoiler policy on that is eternal.

Dungeon Keeper.

Destroy all humans.

Spec ops the line.

Braid.

Manhunt.

Fixed, thanks for the correction. Ironic “We’re wrong all the time” in a comment containing a factual error.

No worries, I meant it in a “Hurr Durr, even the dumb AI gets it, and it doesn’t even know Kirk is dead”, which was perhaps ablest of me.

Going forwards I don’t really know what I want to do about it. I don’t think I’ll stop making layered satirical comments, but posting the explanation along side feels like it’s taking the “bite” away from the satire.

Posting the explanation, without the snark, when someone obviously doesn’t “get it” is probably best. The person asking for a source for Charlie Kirk’s medical exam obviously “didn’t get it”. I should probably have posted the AI summary there to avoid most of the nonsense that followed.

The person who thought I posted an article about George Floyd obviously wasn’t going to respect my time by considering anything I wrote. The person who said I used AI to explain the joke to myself, also wasn’t going to respect my time by reading anything I wrote, there was no avoiding their nonsense. They deserved all the snark they got.

I guess not. I don’t know if that’s because the training data is old. Or, there’s been so much satire around public figures dying that it was more likely article was satire than not. I didn’t inform Gemini it was a Guardian article, perhaps it would have changed response given that, thinking Guardian doesn’t post satire that often.

It got a lot wrong, LLMs aren’t trained to be factually accurate though. They’re trained on us, and we’re wrong all the time.

I don’t believe anyone here was saying there was.

You are correct though. It was obvious some conservatives wanted the execution, they just watched, to not be labeled an execution. “Self inflicted overdose” was a convenient excuse for them, so they ran with it.

I used AI to explain my own joke to myself? I don’t understand your comment.

Like the person I asked to re-read the initial paragraph of the article I linked, explaining the comment I made. I’ll ask you to re-read the initial sentence of the comment I made explaining the joke I made.

I used AI to explain my joke to someone who couldn’t figure out the article about Charlie Kirk, was about Charlie Kirk, even when the initial picture is Charlie Kirk, and the initial sentence names Charlie Kirk.

I’m done with Lemmy for the day until you peeps start to read what you’re replying to.

Ok, just to check I’m not being too obcure I put my initial comment into Gemini.I asked it to explain the comment in the context of a post about the bullet that killed Charlie Kirk. It doesn’t know Kirk is dead, it did get the joke though. Now to the article, would you like to read the initial paragraph again please… Perhaps copy it into your next comment. Who’s the first picture in the article of?

Prompt:

Explain this comment left under an article about the bullet that killed Charlie Kirk:

“I thought Charlie’s medical found lethal doses of fentanyl in his system.”

Gemini:

To understand that comment, you have to look at it through the lens of internet subcultures and political satire. It is a layered reference to the 2020 death of George Floyd and the subsequent memes that emerged from right-wing and left-wing online spaces. Here is the breakdown of why that comment was made:

1. The “Lethal Dose” Trope The specific phrasing—“lethal doses of fentanyl in his system”—is a direct callback to the toxicology report of George Floyd. Following his death, many conservative commentators and social media users argued that Floyd did not die from police restraint, but rather from a drug overdose. By using this exact line in a comment about Charlie Kirk (a prominent conservative figure), the commenter is engaging in “copy-pasta” satire. They are taking a common right-wing talking point and “copy-pasting” it onto a situation involving a conservative to point out what they see as an absurdity or a double standard.
2. The Context of the “Bullet” Article If the article mentioned a “bullet that killed Charlie Kirk,” it is likely referring to a viral piece of misinformation or a specific satirical news story. Charlie Kirk is alive; therefore, any article claiming he was killed by a bullet is either: Satire: (e.g., The Onion or The Babylon Bee style content). Misinformation: A hoax designed to trigger a reaction.
3. The Irony of the Comment The commenter isn’t actually confused about Kirk’s medical records. Instead, they are using dark irony. The Logic: If a conservative argument suggests that a victim of violence actually died of a drug overdose to absolve the shooter/police, the commenter “flips the script” by suggesting that even if Kirk were shot, his “true” cause of death must have been fentanyl. Summary of Intent Mockery: To mock the arguments used in high-profile police brutality cases. Shitposting: To derail a serious or sensationalist headline with a well-known political meme. Parody: To act as a “mirror,” showing how certain political rhetoric sounds when applied to its own side. In short, it’s a cynical joke aimed at the way political deaths are litigated in the “court of public opinion.”

I told you the source: Charlie Kirk’s medical examiner.

I thought Charlie’s medical found lethal doses of fentanyl in his system.

Didn’t want to keep the "dd"s going? Fi"dd"ies, Ti"dd"ies… Oh, I understand.

It depends what you want to do with the art. But an easy answer for me is: the author dies when the author dies. Buy things after they die. Before that: pirate, second hand (I’d reccomend second hand everything though, within limits).

That’s not typically how I want my art though. Knowing what informed the art is interesting to see where it’s supported Vs contradicted in the piece.

Two examples: knowing jk Rowling is bigot then reading HP, well how did we not see it sooner? The series becomes a lot more sinister knowing who wrote it.

In contrast Ender’s game, how is that series written by that man?! It’s about love and the limits of love. It’s about life and the limits of life. Reading the series knowing the person who wrote it is baffling.

In general, knowing the contexts of the piece is interesting to me. Like Saturn Devouring His Son, it was painted directly on the wall of Goya’s house… Why, who paints that directly on the wall of their house?! Wait, Black PaintingS? There’s more?! Not knowing the story of the Black paintings, it’s just an interesting interpretation of a greko-roman myth. But, what hat did Goya see in his past to see that? What did he see in the present to need to materialize it in his dining room? What did he fear for the future?! Fuck.

Do they go ass to mouth?

I quite liked lemmyNSFW for not federating downvotes. Now they’re/we’re/I am on PieFed I’ve been looking for a way to hide downvotes. My engagement can just be reply/upvote/ignore/block/report. I understand why people downvotes, I’m happy you all have them. I’m just not personally interested in them.