Here is the direct quote from Libs of Tik Tok that claims "Boston Children's Hospital is now offering gender affirming hysterectomies for young girls, and it gets much worse". This doesn't count as commentary to you?

This is an example of an untrue claim, and has led to harassment and threats of violence to the staff of the hospital.

I don't know what valuable service you imagine Libs of TikTok is providing, but I guarantee you the actual threats and harassments it inspires are worse.

Libs of TikTok takes the full unedited videos and reposts them. No edits, no commentary, nada. She's just a copy service moving the same bits posted by the original content creator on TikTok to the Libs Of Twitter feed. She literally does nothing but copy their videos and republish them for her Twitter feed.

Apparently there's more to it than that. Nice hysterical rant though.

If that's the case, then they must doing something wrong. As someone who uses OS X at home and a mix of Windows 10 and 11 at work, OS X is far more coherent. Or maybe Microsoft just doesn't have a clear idea what exactly it wants Windows to be?

Until the Chinese people change their government and throw out the fucking CCP, they are one in the same.

Before judging the Chinese people as responsible for everything their government does, it might be worth considering just how difficult it would be to overthrow such a brutal, repressive regime from within.

It would kind of make fighting in the American Revolution look cute in comparison.

You can take your civil discussion and shove it straight up your fucking ass.

Call me crazy, but you were the one saying this ought to be a civil discussion in the first place. Don't really want it? Kindly shove it up your own.

"branch covidians"
"too invested in your new religion"
"threatening to undermine your dogma"
"continue to profess your faith"

Well that just screams someone who is interested in a civil discussion.

Look, if you want to be hysterical just be hysterical. But don't pretend you have any interest in civil discussions or facts. That's not how it's done.

When you ask questions there is no requirement to be neutral, you can ask what you are interested in.

When your goal is to establish any kind of truth it is absolutely vital to use the same standard when evaluating differing viewpoints. Otherwise "what your are interested in" becomes cherry-picking to support whatever you want to be true and not what is.

But you're missing the point of the post you're responding to. So you're saying that the science and drug companies that use it should constantly be questioned in case they get something wrong, misrepresent data, or are just plain not representing our best interests. Fine.

So why is it that so many people who are doing this are not also using this line of questioning on right-wing news sources or whatever random Youtube video they watch that are questioning the vaccines? If they used the same standards on them as they do for more established science, how do you thing they would fare?

With any luck, in 50 years there will have been many more launches like this in some form. Leaving crackpots with a lot more reality to deny.

To be turing-complete, it must be able to simulate the function of every possible turing computation to infinite scale, in principle.

And other than a person getting bored, or forgetting something, or losing track of where they are, or running out of space or life, they can. Again, this is all that's required.

Sorry, but this is a math problem that you're thinking of like an engineering problem. It's just. Not. The point.

I've heard other people claim that if you can simulate any turing machine, you're a turing machine.

Yup, and they'd be wrong. It doesn't prove that. All we can say in that case is that a human being is at least as powerful as a Turing Machine, but can be more so as well. It's sort of like how you prove that Turing Machines and Lambda Calculus both solve the exact same set of problems. By simulating a Universal Turing Machine with Lambda Calculus you prove that it is at least as powerful as TMs. By implementing a Lambda Calculus evaluator with a TM you prove that TMs are at least as powerful LC. And together you prove they have the same computational power. The people you're mentioning with their claim are missing part 2.

At first glance, it's easy to say, "of course a human could do that", and a human with a piece of pen and paper certainly could.

That's all you need to establish that a brain is Turing Complete really. For something to be Turing Complete it just has to be able to emulate the actions of some description of a TM with some input. That's it. The brain figures out how to do the emulation, and in this example the brain calls upon the body to control pen and paper to keep track of the state. Whether or not the activity is fallible is completely irrelevant. All that's important is that it can be done in principle. After all, we don't argue a particular general purpose computer is not Turing Complete because it doesn't have enough memory to solve all problems, or may have memory go bad or a circuit burn out or whatever.

Turing machines are boring.

Maybe. I think the big question in regards to how brains function is whether a sufficiently complex TM is enough to arrive at thought, consciousness, self-awareness, or what have you.

Turing completeness isn't provable for a human brain, nor is it needed to model one.

Errrrr.... what? It's actually pretty trivial to prove that a human brain is Turing Complete. All you have to do is explain to someone how Turing Machines work and ask them how they'd simulate the running of an arbitrary TM with a given input. If they come up with an answer then they have proven that their brain is Turing Complete.

This is in direct reaction to the immediate corporate leftist media narrative that the hippie nudist hemp campaigner who lived in a commune was SOMEHOW BY DEFAULT a white supremacist Republican. You might have accidentally left that bit out? I wonder why?

Speaking of leaving bits out, the below from Wikipedia might be relevant. Sounds like the kind of nonsense one would expect from the alt-right, and the judgement does not come by default.

According to Politico, DePape "inhabited a vivid and resentment-fueled world of conspiracy while living a fringe existence". In 2007, DePape started a personal blog, initially writing about topics such as spirituality and ibogaine. During the months that preceded the attack, DePape resumed writing on his blog after a long hiatus, this time on conspiracy theories and alt-right politics. In multiple posts on social media platforms and at least two blogs, a user with DePape's name and address espoused far-right views, promoting QAnon, Pizzagate, and other far-right conspiracy theories and sharing far-right Internet memes. Law enforcement sources have been "increasingly confident" that these social media posts "are [indeed] from the suspect". DePape's daughter confirmed that DePape was the author of the blog, and that he at times had shared links with her and posting text-message conversations with her.

In 2021, DePape had posted videos by My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell that falsely claimed the 2020 U.S. presidential election to have been stolen; across 2022, he linked to COVID-19 vaccine misinformation videos (claiming that the vaccines were deadly and that data was covered up) and alleged George Floyd had died of a drug overdose rather than being murdered by a police officer. He credited Gamergate with beginning his interest in right-wing politics as well as Jordan Peterson and James A. Lindsay, for his interest in right-wing politics. One month before the attack, a website written under DePape's name declared that any journalist who challenged Trump's election fraud claims "should be dragged straight out into the street and shot". DePape also attacked immigrants, people of color, women, LGBTQ people, social justice warriors, Catholics, and Muslims. He wrote a post in which he proclaimed that Adolf Hitler "did nothing wrong" and promoted a range of antisemitic conspiracy theories, including denying the Holocaust and accusing Jews of orchestrating the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. DePape's online posts also included a range of delusional comments, once attacking Jesus as "the antichrist" and including references to his communication with invisible fairies and the occult. His last post, published a day before the attack, was titled "Why Colleges are becoming Cults".

They all have a similar political slant so in order to get an accurate view of the world people are turning to social media.

If this were true, then the people would be arriving at a more accurate view of the world through social media than they would from the large news networks. I'm not saying that mainstream media doesn't have faults, but to think that social media is making things better is laughable at best.

This doesn't come from people looking for an accurate view of the world. It's from them desperately searching for any facts, real or otherwise, that support their own bias.

...the other is a medical professional, and when he lied to the American people, he gave countless millions of people a reason to distrust what he said...

Somehow I think if the American people who decided to turn away from him did so due to "lies", then they wouldn't have then embraced others who were actually and obviously lying.

Most of the people that I've heard from who despise Fauci have no interest in truth. They're just looking for the lies that best support their biases.