- Joined
- Dec 12, 2022
Sodium Citrate/Phosphate is the industry standard for emulsifying any cheese for melting.
"Mad at the Internet" - a/k/a My Psychotherapy Sessions
- Thread starter Null
- Start date
-
🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2025
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
truly the best jeet
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2022
I will refrain from referring to him as pootahar for one month.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2022
>Can't keep bots out of the comments
>Humans watching the video are bots
You really can't do worse than google and youtube.
They are failing at both ends.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2020
I’m tired of the comments on every music video being “Who’s watching in 2025?”
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2025
I saw a good comment under Steve from Gamer's Nexus's UNHINGED RANT about Youtube getting worse (link
Oh, they don't want to block the butt-bots because those increase engagement to the extent that it makes internal metrics better (so a VP gets his bonus) or simply that the activity around the butt-bots is a signal of video quality (e.g., if people care enough to click report it means the video is better). It is patently obvious now that the problem is not that Google doesn't care, but they want the butt-bots.
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2023
This just leads to further questions, such as "why was Bill Gates claiming to combat malaria in Africa?"
Follow-up: is he the reason?
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2019
764 mentioned
i guess you have do you're thread or anti because .....
i told you so. no pic its probably in null thread.
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2025
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2021
@Null New DMCA news! This time in the obscure world of GIS (Geographic Information Systems) software. Arc GIS is the premier software used to manage and analyze geospatial information for a myriad of applications. S2 Underground is a OSINT rightwing Larper that runs a hobbyist radio group and likes to present himself as a *serious* INFOSEC and GEOPOLITICS analyst. What's relevant here is that he's been using this map making software to track illegal immigrant crossings and incidents by scraping public databases as well as marking the premises of every illegal immigrant activist NGOs in the US.
The maps he made to track these in real time are hosted by the ESRI (the corporation that manages the Arc GIS software) via cloud. These maps are available to the public for download from them. The NGOs have now used the DMCA to force the ESRI to close the hosting of their scraped data in his maps.
The maps he made to track these in real time are hosted by the ESRI (the corporation that manages the Arc GIS software) via cloud. These maps are available to the public for download from them. The NGOs have now used the DMCA to force the ESRI to close the hosting of their scraped data in his maps.
S2 Underground, an OSINT larper who runs a hobbyist ham radio group has had his Arc Pro GIS tracking illegal immigration activist NGOs and illegal alien sightings DMCA'd by the ESRI for the data he includes in his map layers.
https://archive.ph/udWM8 / https://nitter.poast.org/s2_underground/status/1940474087425691764#m
https://archive.ph/nteUN / https://nitter.poast.org/s2_underground/status/1932517328069030118#m
https://github.com/s2underground/
US/Mexico Border Crisis CIP Map - ARC GIS
S2 Underground Common Intelligence Picture (CIP)
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2025
Wow, why would a guy named TheAlmightyLoli be so offended about Null complaining about the most popular English V-tuber making an even more childlike and overtly sexual virtual avatar?
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2020
Here’s an intro song for the stream tomorrow.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2021
I’d argue that the larger issue is that the Internet lets people fall into holes that they’ll get dragged deeper into. 764 and pedophiles will drag impressionable children into them. Trannies and LGBT people will do the same. Even if they aren’t aggressively forcing them in it’ll get them in a place where rather than losing interest in a destructive topic, it’ll be what they love for.
Anime, vidya, and whatever are just the tool instead of a van with candy. Does the subject matters and shit help? Yes. Kids really should not have access to a lot of YouTube videos, short form videos, anime, and what not.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2018
The legal system in America just got a bit faker and a bit gayer.
The Georgian Appeals Court decision
In a court of law you can just say things and they'll be true. Null knows this better than most.
Technology
By Joe Patrice on July 01, 2025 12:48 pm
Share
Every time a lawyer cites a fake case spit out by generative AI, an angel gets its wings. When the lawyers in Mata v. Avianca infamously earned a rebuke for citing an AI-imagined alternate history of the Montreal Convention, many of us assumed the high-profile embarrassment would mark the end of fake cases working their way into filings. Instead, new cases crop up with alarming frequency, ensnaring everyone from Trump’s former fixer to Biglaw to — almost certainly — the DOJ. It seems no amount of public embarrassment can overcome laziness.
But so far, the system has stood up to these errors. Between opposing counsel and diligent judges, fake cases keep getting caught before they result in real mischief. That said, it was always only a matter of time before a poor litigant representing themselves fails to know enough to sniff out and flag Beavis v. Butthead and a busy or apathetic judge rubberstamps one side’s proposed order without probing the cites for verification. Hallucinations are all fun and games until they work their way into the orders.
It finally happened with a trial judge issuing an order based off fake cases (flagged by Rob Freund). While the appellate court put a stop to the matter, the fact that it got this far should terrify everyone.
Shahid v. Esaam, out of the Georgia Court of Appeals, involved a final judgment and decree of divorce served by publication. When the wife objected to the judgment based on improper service, the husband’s brief included two fake cases. The trial judge accepted the husband’s argument, issuing an order based in part on the fake cases. On appeal, the husband did not respond to the fake case claim, but….
They cited MORE fake cases to defend their first set of fake cases. Epic. A perpetual motion machine of bullshit, if you will. Seeking attorney’s fees based on a fake case was a nice touch. Probably should’ve thought of that at the trial court level, it probably would’ve worked.
The appellate court could not make the factual leap to blame AI for the fake cases, but laid out its theory of the case:
Well, there you go! Someone finally found a use for the Chief Justice’s infamous typewriter report. Now it almost seems like a useful expenditure of official resources instead of a cynical opportunity to dodge addressing that his proposed solution to the Court’s deepening ethical cesspool is… JAZZ HANDS!
But there’s a critical line between submitting fake cases and judges acting on fake cases. The urgency the courts feel for stamping out fake citations stems in part from the “there but for the grace of my clerks go I” fear that the judge might bless a fake argument. Now that this has happened to a trial judge out there, the high-profile embarrassment should mark the end of fake cases working their way into orders.
Where have I heard something like that before? *Re-reads first paragraph.*
We’re screwed.
Trial Court Decides Case Based On AI-Hallucinated Caselaw
Appellate court to trial judge: you know these cases are made up, right?By Joe Patrice on July 01, 2025 12:48 pm
Share
Every time a lawyer cites a fake case spit out by generative AI, an angel gets its wings. When the lawyers in Mata v. Avianca infamously earned a rebuke for citing an AI-imagined alternate history of the Montreal Convention, many of us assumed the high-profile embarrassment would mark the end of fake cases working their way into filings. Instead, new cases crop up with alarming frequency, ensnaring everyone from Trump’s former fixer to Biglaw to — almost certainly — the DOJ. It seems no amount of public embarrassment can overcome laziness.
But so far, the system has stood up to these errors. Between opposing counsel and diligent judges, fake cases keep getting caught before they result in real mischief. That said, it was always only a matter of time before a poor litigant representing themselves fails to know enough to sniff out and flag Beavis v. Butthead and a busy or apathetic judge rubberstamps one side’s proposed order without probing the cites for verification. Hallucinations are all fun and games until they work their way into the orders.
It finally happened with a trial judge issuing an order based off fake cases (flagged by Rob Freund). While the appellate court put a stop to the matter, the fact that it got this far should terrify everyone.
Shahid v. Esaam, out of the Georgia Court of Appeals, involved a final judgment and decree of divorce served by publication. When the wife objected to the judgment based on improper service, the husband’s brief included two fake cases. The trial judge accepted the husband’s argument, issuing an order based in part on the fake cases. On appeal, the husband did not respond to the fake case claim, but….
They cited MORE fake cases to defend their first set of fake cases. Epic. A perpetual motion machine of bullshit, if you will. Seeking attorney’s fees based on a fake case was a nice touch. Probably should’ve thought of that at the trial court level, it probably would’ve worked.
The appellate court could not make the factual leap to blame AI for the fake cases, but laid out its theory of the case:
Well, there you go! Someone finally found a use for the Chief Justice’s infamous typewriter report. Now it almost seems like a useful expenditure of official resources instead of a cynical opportunity to dodge addressing that his proposed solution to the Court’s deepening ethical cesspool is… JAZZ HANDS!
But there’s a critical line between submitting fake cases and judges acting on fake cases. The urgency the courts feel for stamping out fake citations stems in part from the “there but for the grace of my clerks go I” fear that the judge might bless a fake argument. Now that this has happened to a trial judge out there, the high-profile embarrassment should mark the end of fake cases working their way into orders.
Where have I heard something like that before? *Re-reads first paragraph.*
We’re screwed.
In a court of law you can just say things and they'll be true. Null knows this better than most.
National Defense Advocate
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2024
I guess if your judge is black, you should focus on just tricking and confusing them.
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2022
Try this on Clarence Thomas and see what happens.
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2025
As much as i dislike this Jeet, i tip my hat to him for having the balls to mention the shiwi, many will just pretend they did it themselves or found it on reddit, anyways give this man 3 google gift cards.
- Joined
- May 6, 2020
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2019
Kinda surprised certain lolsuits haven't featured AI written filings yet.The legal system in America just got a bit faker and a bit gayer.
https://x.com/GodLitigation/status/1940751686298947914 https://ghostarchive.org/archive/SWY7T
https://abovethelaw.com/2025/07/trial-court-decides-case-based-on-ai-hallucinated-caselaw/ https://archive.ph/6pAF9The Georgian Appeals Court decisionTechnology
Trial Court Decides Case Based On AI-Hallucinated Caselaw
Appellate court to trial judge: you know these cases are made up, right?
By Joe Patrice on July 01, 2025 12:48 pm
Share
Every time a lawyer cites a fake case spit out by generative AI, an angel gets its wings. When the lawyers in Mata v. Avianca infamously earned a rebuke for citing an AI-imagined alternate history of the Montreal Convention, many of us assumed the high-profile embarrassment would mark the end of fake cases working their way into filings. Instead, new cases crop up with alarming frequency, ensnaring everyone from Trump’s former fixer to Biglaw to — almost certainly — the DOJ. It seems no amount of public embarrassment can overcome laziness.
But so far, the system has stood up to these errors. Between opposing counsel and diligent judges, fake cases keep getting caught before they result in real mischief. That said, it was always only a matter of time before a poor litigant representing themselves fails to know enough to sniff out and flag Beavis v. Butthead and a busy or apathetic judge rubberstamps one side’s proposed order without probing the cites for verification. Hallucinations are all fun and games until they work their way into the orders.
It finally happened with a trial judge issuing an order based off fake cases (flagged by Rob Freund). While the appellate court put a stop to the matter, the fact that it got this far should terrify everyone.
Shahid v. Esaam, out of the Georgia Court of Appeals, involved a final judgment and decree of divorce served by publication. When the wife objected to the judgment based on improper service, the husband’s brief included two fake cases. The trial judge accepted the husband’s argument, issuing an order based in part on the fake cases. On appeal, the husband did not respond to the fake case claim, but….
They cited MORE fake cases to defend their first set of fake cases. Epic. A perpetual motion machine of bullshit, if you will. Seeking attorney’s fees based on a fake case was a nice touch. Probably should’ve thought of that at the trial court level, it probably would’ve worked.
The appellate court could not make the factual leap to blame AI for the fake cases, but laid out its theory of the case:
Well, there you go! Someone finally found a use for the Chief Justice’s infamous typewriter report. Now it almost seems like a useful expenditure of official resources instead of a cynical opportunity to dodge addressing that his proposed solution to the Court’s deepening ethical cesspool is… JAZZ HANDS!
But there’s a critical line between submitting fake cases and judges acting on fake cases. The urgency the courts feel for stamping out fake citations stems in part from the “there but for the grace of my clerks go I” fear that the judge might bless a fake argument. Now that this has happened to a trial judge out there, the high-profile embarrassment should mark the end of fake cases working their way into orders.
Where have I heard something like that before? *Re-reads first paragraph.*
We’re screwed.
https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:US:42bb6442-d728-4704-ad32-83dbce693d5a/?annonBboxWorkflow=true&viewer%21megaVerb=group-discover https://archive.ph/W8OpA https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ga-court-of-appeals/117442275.html#:~:text=After%20the%20trial%20court%20entered%20a%20final%20judgment,an%20order%20that%20relied%20upon%20non-existent%20case%20law https://archive.ph/0H0jE
In a court of law you can just say things and they'll be true. Null knows this better than most.
