Everystein Singleberg Timeowitz.
(media.scored.co)
Comments (41)
sorted by:
Can we ban .jpg posting articles without linking to them? This shit is just naked agitprop otherwise.
The knob has been turned up to 11 lately. Fucking weird.
To be fair, I have been cantankerous about this issue for a long while now.
Used to be we archived everything almost without exception.
I think a lot of the lack of archiving is due to the war between Archive.today and Brave. You have to use TOR to get it to come up, and even then it sometimes goes infinity captcha.
Since archive.org takes down archives upon request it is not fit for purpose.
Since neither are actually usable, what do you do?
Print that shit out on paper, we're going back in time
Yeah it's been pretty shitty for months now, I'll grant you that.
I know Ghost Archive is a thing but I've no read on how durable it is long term. Still, a .jpg alone is never going to be sufficient for me. It's too easy to spoof something that seems legit in order to gin up animosity in a direction that's advantageous to bad actors. There needs to be some awareness that there are those who would gleefully psyop the fuck out of everyone on this board for their own machinations and we can prevent that with just a modicum of verification effort. This is going to become increasingly important as generative AI tech improves and we enter an era where we will have "genuine" polaroid photos of Hitler riding a dinosaur into battle against Winston Churchill, except it'll be something far more subtle and and believable.
Wtf are you talking about? I use brave on 3 devices and have no issues with archive.today
Let's also ban YouTube video posting without an AI generated summary of the video at the least.
I say the opposite -- anything with an AI summary should get auto deleted
You're going to watch a two hour YouTube video some guy posts and leaves 0 comment as to why he posted it?
You misunderstand -- AI summaries are faggot shit. Why can't the poster summarize in his own terms?
I mean they should but I'd rather have an AI summary at a minimum than nothing at all. The poster should post a summary of the video and at least have a reason for why they're sharing it.
Look at you volunteering to summarize every long video without a human summary!
Great work man. The hours you are willing to commit to save us form human-slop is just ... a real contribution!
Thanks in advance, buddy!
Couldn't you just get AI to summarize it for you yourself?
Could've you just not read the useful AI summary?
I think we can do better than an AI summary. If someone's gonna dump a link to a two hour video then they can damn well take the two minutes to type up why the hell we should care about it.
I'm kind of ambivalent to the AI summary, but I think forcing the friction of demanding the poster put in some perfunctory level of effort does a lot to discourage lazy and worthless postings. There are lots of people who just want their little dopamine hit of thread response notifications rather than to actually engage in discourse or the dissemination of valuable information.
My ambivalence is getting weighted more to the negative side by the day as the worst people leverage the worst aspects of it, the least offensive being lazily generating a summary of some random video just to get fake internet points as you say, and the worst being someone who thought a version number for a piece of software was an IP address telling a room full of developers that their jobs are going to be obsolete and that they need to deal with it.
Perhaps I take it too personal but I kinda have to, I only truly know what is personal to me.
Moronic. I'm not watching every two hour video posted here
And require the original link, not just some faggot link to an archive gated by captchas. Provide both, only a faggot archives without the original link as well.
Archive is important, but both is ideal.
Agreed. Both are required.
Sorry, I just thought this is what people share here.
https://archive.is/TWjtQ
https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20260527-estevanico-the-african-explorer-who-crossed-north-america
So they disingenuously use the word African with the picture of a subsaharan to make modern readers think he was black when in reality he was a moor, which are not black. There are even statues and paintings which portray him as not black since moors were light skinned arab colonists.
When does his Ubisoft adaptation come out?
Same time as his Netflix adaptation. They're doing a cross-promotion.
Arabs aren't real goy. Just the jews
It gets dumber the more you read it.
"Nearly 500 years ago, a Moroccan man walked thousands of miles from Florida to the Pacific Coast, becoming the first known outsider to see the American West."
Immediately followed by: "In 1528, a man from Morocco washed up on the coast of present-day Texas, more dead than alive"
It then proceeds to show a map depicting he walked from Texas, Not Florida (AT MINIMUM a 374 mile difference), westward. Based on the map, the difference would actually be closer to 821 miles that the author essentially fucked up by, and that's straight line through rivers, swamps, marshes, valleys, that would have been there centuries ago, not highways we have now.
Don't forget they have a picture of a black as the lead image when moors were tawny Mediterraneans.
Ah, yeah, that is what I remember from hearing this story many times growing up. Galveston to Mexico/New Spain after a decent amount of time spent on Galveston itself. Was wondering where the hell the Florida thing came from.
Edit: I think they are counting the time on the ship, they went past Florida hugging the coast before being shipwrecked.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Expedition_Cabeza_de_Vaca_Karte.png/1920px-Expedition_Cabeza_de_Vaca_Karte.png
Many thanks.
Yes, glorify their past. Marvel at their false accomplishments. Now you're obligated to excuse the present-day reality that they're constantly proving themselves to be hateful, violent, untrustable, and parasitic.
That sounds mighty antiseptic of you...
Yes and they will use similar stories like this when they replace Columbus in the US history books. Nothing but WE WUZ for every part of it, while they play "Hamilton" for the kids and pretend that's what actually happened, rap included
Does this refer to the guy shipwrecked in Texas? Far from the first, and also Spanish.
Also that landscape would be extremely wrong for the Texas Gulf coast, but I guess I shouldn't expect foreigners to know the difference between parts of Texas that are hundreds of miles apart.
Edit: Also that halberd is a bit long for a period Spanish explorer/conquistador halberd, the ones I have seen in museums were all surprisingly short.
"When in doubt, just make shit up and force it on the goyim as true. Then dare them to question you."
--- Rabbi Moishe Rabbinowiczsternbergerstinegold
Typical Moroccans trying to steal the Congonese thunder of Juan Garrido.
In all seriousness though, this piecemeal reconstruction of history through the flimsiest of scraps is testament to why accurate archives are required.
I'm sure Estebanico also visited Hawaiki and Atlantis on his travels to Caparuch (Liberating Japan while he was at it). But if academic blackface isn't recognised soon we'll quickly find out that Estebanico also flew the golden condor to Magellanica hoping to reestablish them with Thule to bring about the prophecy of Shangri-La and have the Ayran lizard people come out from the centre of the Earth.
People from the future are painfully aware of this issue.
Imagine believing in fairy tales and bbc
Did the BBC take some sort of extra cuck elixir? They seem so happy to erase the first B in their name, or replace it with Black.