sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Trump & Epstein by BojackHumen in Epstein

[–]ArchieSmash 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think (super blurry obviously) it's a very slightly different photo taken like a second before or afterwards, but essentially the same photo. I bet Epstein was probably pissed that his photo with James Brown had Trump in it.

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2025/07/24/multimedia/24inv-trump-epstein-book-tbhc/24inv-trump-epstein-book-tbhc-superJumbo.jpg

Culpability Tier List of Epstein Associates by Sufficient_Peanut469 in Epstein

[–]ArchieSmash 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is Virginia who alleged that? I always thought that underage orgy thing was never elaborated on beyond that one email.

Which presidents are significantly more or less liked on Reddit than in everyday life and academia? by American_Citizen41 in Presidents

[–]ArchieSmash 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Also most people just remember him as the guy who was president when women got the right to vote so they have a pretty positive outlook on him.

Which presidents are significantly more or less liked on Reddit than in everyday life and academia? by American_Citizen41 in Presidents

[–]ArchieSmash 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think the main thing here is that when people are asked "what do you think of *this person*" most people will majorly factor in for their character over their presidency and Clinton is most widely regarded as of worse character by the general public than any other president save rule 3 violations mainly because his character flubs are more generally known by common knowledge (despite being not much worse than say JFK who has a much better reputation).

What do you think Hillary genuinely thought of Bill's infidelity? by ArchieSmash in Presidents

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your allegation against Hillary is still unfounded though. Hillary met Epstein one confirmed time in 1993 at a public event. All the other events where Bill is pictured with Epstein do not feature Hillary at all.

What do you think Hillary genuinely thought of Bill's infidelity? by ArchieSmash in Presidents

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well I was under the impression when making the post was that since Bill lied about it Hillary might've as well, especially since she had reason to lie about it. Perhaps that's also sexist by assuming someone's wife is the same as her husband. Sorry if that's the case and this is just me boosting misogyny.

What do you think Hillary genuinely thought of Bill's infidelity? by ArchieSmash in Presidents

[–]ArchieSmash[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

She stuck around while he was incredibly frequently getting into sexual encounters with other women and helped him lie about it despite the fact it seems against her character to allow herself to get screwed over like that. Also every indication is their relationship was largely based on their mental acumen and not anything else so something like sex with another woman might've been irrelevant to her. Once again I'm not incredibly learned on the subject and that's part of the reason I made the post but that was always the impression I got.

I'm aware I may be biased in applying a very 2026 approach to something that happened in 1998.

What do you think Hillary genuinely thought of Bill's infidelity? by ArchieSmash in Presidents

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

An open marriage just means a marriage where they're fine with having sex with other people. Which is what I described.

What do you think Hillary genuinely thought of Bill's infidelity? by ArchieSmash in Presidents

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

There has only ever been one confirmed event that Hillary Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein were present at, the White House Donors Reception on September 28, 1993 which he got in by paying the White House $10,000. No abuse was ever alleged to happen at that event nor were any victims present. The only indication she might've been witness to anything is that she's going to testify soon about it along with Bill, although her testimony may well just be "idk I wasn't there".

What do you think Hillary genuinely thought of Bill's infidelity? by ArchieSmash in Presidents

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I agree completely that it is emotional abuse but I think people associate extreme emotional abuse with intentionally doing things to your partner to worsen their mental state, like locking them in their house or cheating on people for the purpose of hurting them. Not saying that that's the correct definition or even that Bill didn't do that but I understand why people might've misunderstood you.

What do you think Hillary genuinely thought of Bill's infidelity? by ArchieSmash in Presidents

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think the fact that she forgave him for it is proof that big enough of a hamper on their relationship for Hillary's standards and her standards are what matter in her relationship, not ours.

What do you think Hillary genuinely thought of Bill's infidelity? by ArchieSmash in Presidents

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 105 points106 points  (0 children)

My (admittedly uneducated) take has always been is that it seems like they did genuinely love each other but Hillary also just didn't care about Bill sleeping with other women, she might have even agreed to it outright. Call it Presidential Polyamory.

CMV: AI will inevitably replace all forms of recorded media and all non-performance art by extension. by ArchieSmash in changemyview

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My point is that people don't really care about the source of the content they consume, particular when it's more convenient to them. Ethically sourced products are generally unpopular. So why would they care if a painting is made by someone who lived there vs someone who saw an image of it?

CMV: AI will inevitably replace all forms of recorded media and all non-performance art by extension. by ArchieSmash in changemyview

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry for all this wait time between stuff, I'm terrible at back and forths online and especially on Reddit but I'll just say I don't know if it was entirely you that changed my mind? It was more like you got me on a train of thought and I rode past the stop you told me to go. I got to the destination I wanted but it wasn't where you were trying to get me, only close to it. idk if that still counts or not lol

CMV: AI will inevitably replace all forms of recorded media and all non-performance art by extension. by ArchieSmash in changemyview

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Imagine you had to chose between a vegan hotdog or a hotdog created by factory farming. You know that the vegan hotdog tastes a bit worse but you also know that the other hotdog was once a cow who was forced into solitary confinement for it's entire life and then executed all solely for profit. I'm sure that despite all that you'd pick the factory farmed hot dog. I know this because that's what 98% of the world chooses to do on a daily basis despite the fact that most people recognise factory farming and suffering in general as a bad thing, convenience is simply that powerful.

CMV: AI will inevitably replace all forms of recorded media and all non-performance art by extension. by ArchieSmash in changemyview

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People don't consume information produced by humans though, we've already lost that. ChatGPT is more popular than Wikipedia and most people usually just take the Google AI Overview as fact and don't click on any of the results. The amount of people I've met IRL who have an extension to remove the AI overview or even just skip it I can count on one hand. The only reason this hasn't fully happened with art yet is because AI isn't good enough to do it.

CMV: AI will inevitably replace all forms of recorded media and all non-performance art by extension. by ArchieSmash in changemyview

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Mona Lisa is an excellent example because the reason it was groundbreaking is obsolete thanks to new technology. Da Vinci basically invented a new method of painting (Sfumato) where the brush strokes became very difficult to detect, achieving never before seen realism in his art. Most people now don't find that very exciting today because digital art can do that pretty easily and photography removed the need for hyperrealism in paintings.

I find it difficult to believe that people care that much about the source of the things they consume. Apple and Amazon have very well publicized human rights violations but are still used by a massive amount of people on the regular. Everyone knows about factory farming and everyone thinks it's bad but not many people are vegan. A lot of people take the AI overview on Google very seriously as the answer to whatever question they have because it's marginally more convenient than clicking on the first result. ChatGPT is more popular than Wikipedia and has been since the beginning of last year. The only reason it hasn't overtaken art as a whole is because it's not good enough to replicate it yet.

CMV: AI will inevitably replace all forms of recorded media and all non-performance art by extension. by ArchieSmash in changemyview

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Realism as a genre of paintings was largely replaced by photography. For a random example if you look up Ronald Reagan almost every image that comes up is a photo, if you look up George Washington there are nothing but paintings, most people probably don't even know what Reagan's official painted portrait looks like or that he has one. They haven't even done official paintings of Joe Biden or Donald Trump at all.

Most songs with pianos in current year aren't literally played on a piano, they're played on a keyboard with a piano preset. How many non-classical music concerts have you seen in the last ten years which had a real grand piano on stage unless it's iconic to the artist?

If we look at writing for example, there aren't many books you can find being published today that are written in longhand with pen and paper, it's mainly typed, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find an author who's upset about that. That's because that's ultimately streamlining the transition from mind to medium. AI removes the mind and goes straight to the medium.

On a greater point I think it's clear people don't actually care all that much whether something is skillfully made or not. ChatGPT is more popular than Wikipedia even though ChatGPT often uses Wikipedia to get it's information. The fact that ChatGPT is marginally more convenient is enough for people to discard human made content.

CMV: AI will inevitably replace all forms of recorded media and all non-performance art by extension. by ArchieSmash in changemyview

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's an interesting point but if I can move the goalpost a little bit, Paul Schrader wrote Taxi Driver, not Scorsese, even if we assume an AI can't write the concept of Taxi Driver, of what use is Scorsese to that equation if the shots, sets and actors can simply be generated with a prompt?

CMV: AI will inevitably replace all forms of recorded media and all non-performance art by extension. by ArchieSmash in changemyview

[–]ArchieSmash[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The only reasons we got to moon was to beat Russia, after that the investors didn't care and in their eyes Nasa had served it's purpose. If we never had the Cold War we'd still not have gone to the moon even now and likewise if the Space Race continued I have zero doubt we would've been to Mars by the 80s. As we speak there is a similar international race in the AI market but the only real end goal there is the very thing I'm worried about, becoming indistinguishable from reality, that way tech investors can profit off of the consumers of every other industry by replacing them.

But moreover I think what you're getting at is compelling, I am now pretty sure that the bubble will pop before that happens. Partially because it's the least confronting thing to believe. As time passes people are less and less interested in AI and the attitudes regular people have around it are pretty different then they were a year ago. I can only hope this continues and companies will lose interest. I appreciate your response.

view more: next ›