![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
asthfghl posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsI'm increasingly convinced that in 2026 the real global superpower isn’t the US, China or the EU.
It's the Screenshot. Here's how it goes.
A politician says something on Monday.
Video appears on Tuesday proving the opposite.
By Wednesday everyone claims the video is fake.
On Thursday fact-checkers explain the context.
By Friday AI has generated 400 new versions anyway (that's where our Friday Offtopic kicks in).
And by Saturday half the internet is arguing about a quote nobody actually said.
I don't actually use the internet on Sundays so I'm not sure what's going on at that point. Need a day in the week where I'm away from all that noise. So I usually go hiking.
Anyways. Post-truth politics used to mean "people ignore facts".
Now it’s more like: “there are so many competing facts, screenshots, clips, edits, contexts and counter-contexts that everyone just picks the version that emotionally suits them best”. Oh, and let's not forget deep-fakes.
Honestly, future historians are going to need digital archaeologists. Hah, here's an idea for a new job!
Recent example of AI-generated political confusion: CHECK
It's the Screenshot. Here's how it goes.
A politician says something on Monday.
Video appears on Tuesday proving the opposite.
By Wednesday everyone claims the video is fake.
On Thursday fact-checkers explain the context.
By Friday AI has generated 400 new versions anyway (that's where our Friday Offtopic kicks in).
And by Saturday half the internet is arguing about a quote nobody actually said.
I don't actually use the internet on Sundays so I'm not sure what's going on at that point. Need a day in the week where I'm away from all that noise. So I usually go hiking.
Anyways. Post-truth politics used to mean "people ignore facts".
Now it’s more like: “there are so many competing facts, screenshots, clips, edits, contexts and counter-contexts that everyone just picks the version that emotionally suits them best”. Oh, and let's not forget deep-fakes.
Honestly, future historians are going to need digital archaeologists. Hah, here's an idea for a new job!
Recent example of AI-generated political confusion: CHECK
Could Romania and Moldova unite?
20 May 2026 14:28fridiThe idea of Romania and Moldova uniting is no longer some fringe nationalist fantasy. It’s becoming a serious political discussion.
For the first time, both countries have presidents who openly view reunification positively...
For the first time, both countries have presidents who openly view reunification positively...
Could Romania and Moldova unite?
20 May 2026 14:28fridi posting in talkpolitics
The idea of Romania and Moldova uniting is no longer some fringe nationalist fantasy. It’s becoming a serious political discussion:
https://cepa.org/article/a-romania-moldova-union-work-has-begun/
For the first time, both countries have presidents who openly view reunification positively. Moldovan president Maia Sandu recently said she would vote “yes” in a referendum on unification, while Romanian president Nicusor Dan has also signaled support for the idea.
Honestly, this development shouldn’t surprise anyone. Romania and Moldova already share the same language, deep historical roots, and very close cultural ties. Many Moldovans already hold Romanian citizenship, work or study in Romania, and consume Romanian media every day. In practice, the connection between the two societies is already extremely strong.
Historically, the territories were part of the same state before being divided by the Russian Empire in the 19th century. Moldova later spent decades inside the Soviet Union, while Romania developed separately. Since Moldova became independent in 1991, the idea of reunification has existed politically, but for many years it remained marginal.
( That is now changing )
Dara, an underdog success story
17 May 2026 22:16asthfghl posting in talkpoliticsBulgaria wins Eurovision Song Contest
I'm not really a Eurovision fan, and this type of music is usually not my thing either. But as a Bulgarian, I have to admit that Dara's victory is a major moment for Bulgaria and probably one of the biggest cultural success stories our country has had in years. Whether people personally like the song or not, the scale of the achievement is hard to deny.
( Read more... )
I'm not really a Eurovision fan, and this type of music is usually not my thing either. But as a Bulgarian, I have to admit that Dara's victory is a major moment for Bulgaria and probably one of the biggest cultural success stories our country has had in years. Whether people personally like the song or not, the scale of the achievement is hard to deny.
( Read more... )
Friday offtopic. A fascinating hypothesis, the multi species world
15 May 2026 14:34airiefairie posting in talkpoliticsWhat if Neanderthals and Denisovans survived and managed to mostly repel Homo Sapiens advance out of Africa, leading to a world with multiple competing human species?
I’ve been thinking lately about how different history might have looked if Neanderthals and Denisovans had survived alongside us instead of disappearing. Not as cavemen hiding in forests, but as actual competing civilisations with their own kingdoms, religions, armies, and identities. Europe could have been dominated by Neanderthals, Asia by Denisovans, while Homo sapiens would have expanded out of Africa much later through maritime trade and naval power.
What fascinates me most is that politics, religion, and even the meaning of “human” would probably look completely different. Ancient empires might justify rule based on species instead of ethnicity, while universalist religions would emerge trying to unite multiple intelligent human species under one moral system. Ironically, despite endless conflict, the long-term outcome would probably still be mixing and gradual unification into one blended humanity. The more I read about recent discoveries around Neanderthals and Denisovans, the more realistic this scenario actually feels.
Some interesting reading too:
Smithsonian Magazine article on Denisovans and other ancient humans
I’ve been thinking lately about how different history might have looked if Neanderthals and Denisovans had survived alongside us instead of disappearing. Not as cavemen hiding in forests, but as actual competing civilisations with their own kingdoms, religions, armies, and identities. Europe could have been dominated by Neanderthals, Asia by Denisovans, while Homo sapiens would have expanded out of Africa much later through maritime trade and naval power.
What fascinates me most is that politics, religion, and even the meaning of “human” would probably look completely different. Ancient empires might justify rule based on species instead of ethnicity, while universalist religions would emerge trying to unite multiple intelligent human species under one moral system. Ironically, despite endless conflict, the long-term outcome would probably still be mixing and gradual unification into one blended humanity. The more I read about recent discoveries around Neanderthals and Denisovans, the more realistic this scenario actually feels.
Some interesting reading too:
Smithsonian Magazine article on Denisovans and other ancient humans
Eugenics v.2.0, with improved marketing
12 May 2026 14:21kiaa posting in talkpoliticsFor most of the 20th century, the idea of "improving humanity" through selective breeding was associated with some of the darkest political movements in history. Today, the same basic idea is returning, but under a cleaner and more modern name: Gene Optimization.
At first, the argument sounds reasonable. If we can prevent children from inheriting severe diseases, why wouldn't we? Few people would oppose using gene editing to eliminate conditions that cause suffering and early death. The problem is that technology rarely stops where it begins.
The line between "healing" and "enhancement" will become politically and economically impossible to defend. Once wealthy parents can pay for higher intelligence potential, stronger bodies, lower risk of depression, or even cosmetic traits, the pressure to compete will begin immediately. In highly unequal societies, parents will not see this as luxury, they will see it as necessity.
( That is where today's politics become relevant )
Some more on this: READ
At first, the argument sounds reasonable. If we can prevent children from inheriting severe diseases, why wouldn't we? Few people would oppose using gene editing to eliminate conditions that cause suffering and early death. The problem is that technology rarely stops where it begins.
The line between "healing" and "enhancement" will become politically and economically impossible to defend. Once wealthy parents can pay for higher intelligence potential, stronger bodies, lower risk of depression, or even cosmetic traits, the pressure to compete will begin immediately. In highly unequal societies, parents will not see this as luxury, they will see it as necessity.
( That is where today's politics become relevant )
Some more on this: READ