Gaza was a lab for the coming warfare (or genocides). Same process, to use AI guided drones and "smart" bombs to slaughter civilian targets.
Thank you Tech bros
GenZ waking up to the injustices of the world, then you have olighouls taking over TikTok, NeoNazi taking over tweet-o-sphere, then politicians come with good intentions like "we must protect our young people"...
We need people to wake up to the injustices because if we failed to do so we will all embark in a period of obscurantism the world has never known.
Hope and peace to all
Article dates from 2025.
The fake recent drama about AI actors military links when they are associated in the current ethnical cleansing of the Palestinians by Israel and its allies.
"A new investigation alleges that OpenAI’s identity verification vendor, Persona, operated dedicated watchlist screening infrastructure since 2023 and exposed 53MB of internal dashboard code via public source maps. Here’s what was discovered, what is confirmed, what remains unproven, and what it means for biometric data, compliance reporting, and online privacy in 2026."
You forgot eighty years of occupation, cultural , economical and ethnical cleansing of the local indigenous people called Palestinians with help of US and Western countries mainly.
While you have a valid point overall, I always hate this specific phrasing because it's either ignorant of history or implies there is a statute of limitations on being indigenous. And if it is the latter, you're actively being counterproductive to the cause because that is telling the Israelis that the land will be morally theirs if they can hold it for enough generations thereby encouraging continued occupation.
But surely, the different tribes in Australia also moved around and replaced each other? They might all come from the same people that came to Australia first, but that doesn’t mean they are native to the place they currently live in. If a tribe moved from southern Australia to the north and replaced another tribe, who gets the land now? And how do you settle that without some arbitrary statute of limitations?
Sorry for shifting the goalposts now, but we still need a method to determine what to do with the rest of the earth, right? Who gets to stay in the different parts of Europe for example?
"We" haven't settled anything .. neither of us is an expert or player in the domain of indigenuous land ownership.
Your "assertion" (weakly stated) was
> I’m pretty sure every tribe that’s considered indigenous now at any place has replaced some other group that lived there before them.
which is _false_.
A single counter example suffices, the Māori people of New Zealand are still in a shared treaty with European settlers and no prior humans were displaced by the Māori people when they first arrived circe 1320 or so.
Australia and that region offer up many many other examples.
> Who gets to stay in the different parts of Europe for example?
I cannot see how this is related to your global assertion nor can I see how I'm responsible to answer it.
The original problem is whether there is a "statute of limitations" for being indigenous.
Even when my original assertion that every single tribe replaced another tribe at some point is wrong, there still needs to be some mechanism do determine what to do with the rest of the world where my claim applies.
If you take the view of history that the ability to forcibly drive other people off their land grants the new inhabitants a valid claim to that land, then Israel's actions are only objectionable because they are happening now rather than in the history books. It's inherently a doctrine of might is right, and the Israelis are mightier than the Palestinians at this current moment in history.
Right, but at least historically, what alternative is there? You can’t really unroll thousands of years of human history and make everyone go back to where their ancestors came from (even just because people ended up mixing after colonizing other places), so you have to take some state as the correct one and then condemn every change after that (or just let everyone do whatever they want).
Otherwise, how would you decide who gets which part of the world?
Which is exactly why this area has been in conflict for millennia. Many different groups have valid claims to the area being their historic homeland. Dubbing one single group as "indigenous" is a refutation of all the other people's historical claims on that land and it means all the Israelis have to do is wait out this conflict until it becomes "history" and the Palestinians lose that "indigenous" label.
Obviously Palestinians were displaced and that needs to be addressed, but ethnic cleansing is a tough sell. Their population has multiplied by 20x since then.
Forced displacement due to the mass destruction of all facilities in an area consists exactly in ethnic cleansing.
Ethnic cleansing means : systemic removal of a group or person by another group of person in an area. And it's exactly what's happening.
It makes no sense to say it's neither a genocide nor ethnic cleansing if the population grows. Same as saying there were no genocide or ethnic cleansing in Rwanda or Bosnia since the population has grown.
I mean by that definition, USA's immigration enforcement constitutes ethnic cleansing. I guess I just question your moral authority to second guess Israel's handling of their very unique situation.
Indeed, it is ethnic cleansing.
This situation isn't unique at all. Actually, it's quite common in History. The same happened to Algeria with the French colonization.
Arabs are not indigenous to Palestine. Palestine was Roman when it was colonized by the Arabs. Before Palestine, Judea was a Jewish state which was colonized by the Romans.
But it didn’t. Anthropic is training using publicly visible data - which is arguably fair use. But creating tens of thousands of accounts, violating the terms of service of Anthropic, and then training on private information, is straight up theft. And it follows a LONG history of intellectual property theft by China. The US and other countries should not tolerate this type of asymmetric warfare.
reply