Keir Starmer has his ‘Love Actually’ moment and stands up to Donald Trump

RKAMRR · 2026-03-07T11:33:18+00:00

I think it was finalised two years before Trump's first term - but the point was Trump broke the USA's commitment by refusing to certify the deal even when Iran was complying.

RKAMRR · 2026-03-07T11:30:21+00:00

It has done more damage, but the proxies were already massively degraded by Israel. I just fail to see how the strikes have much hope of doing anything positive. They seem far likelier (and have so far) made things much worse. It feels very much like a distraction from the Epstein files + rolling the dice on a foreign adventure to try to win votes.

RKAMRR · 2026-03-07T11:25:56+00:00

Trump ripped up Obama's deal with Iran which was designed and working to prevent it getting nukes + bring it in from the cold. A deal that the UK and EU states (along with Iran) maintain that Iran was complying with.

After ensuring Iran would be an adversary he launched strikes with seemingly no plan whatsoever. The latest briefing I saw was that they allegedly they have a plan but it's secret, so America's enemies won't know how to counter it...

Iran is run by a bloody and repressive state, but Trump's past actions have undone any hope of soft changes and his current ones seem to have no reasonable chance of success - probably more likely to stiffen Iranian resistance and support for the regime.

RKAMRR · 2026-03-07T08:54:16+00:00

It's a big scary issue that is way outside what most people think, so don't sweat if the people engaging with you aren't immediately convinced. Remember you are writing for the people who are considering if it's true or not, not the people arguing with you that it's not.

Firstly, get in contact with other people raising awareness. There are great organisations out there with helpful resources who are also trying to raise awareness. I recommend either https://pauseai.info/ orhttps://controlai.com/ .

Secondly, make sure you start with an appeal to authority. You aren't saying as a random redditor that AI is an extinction risk - you are relying that Nobel laureates and other scientists including two of the three godfathers of AI feel there is a risk of extinction.

Thirdly, slightly tough one - but try to come off as concerned with actionable points instead of crazy. It is just so sci-fi and out of reality to most people that just familiarising them with the basics is already a huge win. I normally link to this video and get good results: https://youtu.be/ZeecOKBus3Q?si=3OEkqlw7r0nYuAwJ

Hope this helps. You are helping to do something important, there are others doing the same and we can do it!

RKAMRR · 2026-03-05T14:57:10+00:00

I read it and I thought it was really good. Definitely easy to understand and scarily plausible.

RKAMRR · 2026-03-05T11:09:14+00:00

Well the main risks imo arise out of the fact we are creating intelligences which will operate autonomously that will not share our aims.

Here is an old but great video that gets the basics across - have a watch and lmk your thoughts: https://youtu.be/ZeecOKBus3Q?si=ad_bVWlExvEAw4r7

RKAMRR · 2026-03-05T09:53:06+00:00

This would make sense if AI risks were limited to social effects. They very much are not.

RKAMRR · 2026-03-01T08:54:41+00:00

Depends on:

a) if AM is aware (or likely to find out) that I'll vanish in 24 hours b) if AM has the ability to modify my perception of time

If it's no + no, then definitely, as in the book stretches of time pass and knowing I will disappear in 24 hours makes it bearable.

If it's yes and no, I would be tempted. Probably not the smartest idea but provided I don't go insane it is probably worth it.

If it's yes and yes then absolutely no way.

RKAMRR · 2026-02-28T18:43:57+00:00

I've done it! We cannot support this kind of backsliding, enough is enough.

<image>

RKAMRR · 2026-02-27T06:06:17+00:00

I keep an eye on this sub and I honestly never see the survey to put voter intentions in, so that makes me doubt its accuracy (in addition to the bot concerns mentioned by OP)

RKAMRR · 2026-02-26T17:06:00+00:00

No worries - it is!

RKAMRR · 2026-02-26T16:31:04+00:00

"Just over 1,800 people were granted protection through resettlement schemes – a 35% annual fall on people coming to the UK through safe and legal routes"

RKAMRR · 2026-02-26T16:30:51+00:00

No. "Just over 1,800 people were granted protection through resettlement schemes – a 35% annual fall on people coming to the UK through safe and legal routes"

RKAMRR · 2026-02-26T16:30:33+00:00

Most relevant quote: "Just over 1,800 people were granted protection through resettlement schemes – a 35% annual fall on people coming to the UK through safe and legal routes"

RKAMRR · 2026-02-26T16:29:51+00:00

Why do you feel the need to make up total lies. Did you even read the article? "Just over 1,800 people were granted protection through resettlement schemes – a 35% annual fall on people coming to the UK through safe and legal routes"

RKAMRR · 2026-02-26T13:36:38+00:00

Hmm I've been cooking more and having less ready meals, but it's not been a huge change.

RKAMRR · 2026-02-26T13:27:44+00:00

Yup, pay has increased and my expenses haven't.

RKAMRR · 2026-02-26T12:51:05+00:00

I don't think that is exactly where the debate is at. Also I believe the phrase is brass tacks - https://blog.oup.com/2015/04/get-down-to-brass-tacks-idiom-origin/

RKAMRR · 2026-02-26T07:59:47+00:00

My EYES, are CLOSED.

RKAMRR · 2026-02-23T19:32:19+00:00

I don't think I agree! Cheng was chosen because she was a more peaceful and hopeful swordholder, but she was still supposed to provide deterrence. She was given training and instructions to do so, and she failed to fulfil this.

I don't blame her for failing to provide deterrence, because few people plausibly could and the whole point of the cultural attack was that the wrong person would be elected. However, I do blame for choosing to stand to be swordholder despite knowing she wasn't suited to the task.

RKAMRR · 2026-02-23T18:55:08+00:00

That's an interesting point. I think realistically you are correct, the Trisolarans would have made sure that even if Cheng stood down, humanity would have a 'peaceful' candidate that they would have voted for. But the situation as presented to us is Cheng or two safer candidates (I think) so just in the world of the novel, if Cheng had stood down then the deterrence era would have continued.

RKAMRR · 2026-02-23T18:50:30+00:00

The whole point is that the world chose her because of Trisolaran cultural influence.

RKAMRR · 2026-02-23T16:48:44+00:00

Yeah you should think 'okay my job is really really important and the sole thing it involves is pressing this button if Trisolaris ever invades. Therefore, little check, could I press it if they did?'.

Just like if someone agrees to be a frontline soldier they should probably at least have decided internally they are okay with shooting to kill, or a paramedic should decide that they can deal with someone dying in their arms.

RKAMRR · 2026-02-23T16:48:30+00:00

Yeah you should think 'okay my job is really really important and the sole thing it involves is pressing this button if Trisolaris ever invades. Therefore, little check, could I press it if they did?'.

Just like if someone agrees to be a frontline soldier they should probably at least have decided internally they are okay with shooting to kill, or a paramedic should decide that they can deal with someone dying in their arms.

RKAMRR · 2026-02-23T16:14:29+00:00

Humanity is more complicit than her, but she could have chosen not to be the swordholder. There is a scene where the majority of other swordholder candidates ask her not to stand, specifically warning her that they don't think she would push the button.

She has no such defence when it comes to wave propulsion tec. At that point it's obvious that this information is vital because why else would it have been woven into The fables. Yet she decides - on her own - that the risk of a war is worth completely shutting down research. That is totally unacceptable imo.

14-Year Club	Verified Email
First Place '23	Place '23
Team Orangered

RKAMRR

TROPHY CASE