I see a lot of these types of photos shared around as a gotcha, but it makes me genuinely wonder: is there any reason to believe that everyone who visited the island was involved with sex trafficking minors, or even “just” skeevy barely-18s in bikinis type stuff? Obviously people like Prince Andrew (and likely Trump) were implicated in some heinous shit, and plenty of others willingly associated with Epstein even after his original conviction. But it seems like he and Maxwell would logically keep the worst aspects of their operation under wraps and only “initiate” people that they wanted to blackmail. At least, as long as it’s plausible that they used the island for regular rich-people-hobnobbing in addition to the criminal stuff, it feels bad to use a photo of them with someone as evidence that person is guilty (absent corroborating evidence of at least the fact that the photo was dated after Epstein’s first conviction).

That’s assuming the photo is real/accurate of course. I tried searching this one to see if it was before or after the conviction, and the only provenance I found linked it to some alt-right/4chan sites years ago.

banishbigbrother.com/flock-camera-map/

Hey, thanks for saying so – I appreciate it.

Where did I say that was a good thing?

Ah yes, the other can’t-miss trick, “everyone who isn’t 100% on board with or mildly questions the hate train is a shill.”

Asking for less delusional anti-AI arguments isn’t AI boosting.

My point was that saying that “everyone hates this” and “nobody wants this” (what the shirt in the post says) is flatly untrue. Whether ChatGPT has a billion daily active users or 500 million weekly active users or whatever is just trivia that doesn’t really change the gist of what I’m saying. Lots and lots and lots of people really like AI tools and use them every single day. Ignoring that fact and pretending like everyone agrees with you is dumb.

Can you share specific credible reports? The stuff I’ve seen has been anonymous tips to the FBI tipline that were included in the files. Salacious and maybe even true, but little more than “trust me bro.” Heck, even witnesses that come forward can have questionable credibility (remember Biden accuser Tara Reade, who has since defected to Russia?). I want to see persuasive evidence (though again, I kind of dread it).

Regardless, it also means hundreds of millions of people use it and other AI tools on a daily basis. They’re not all being forced to at gunpoint. Trying to pretend that the opinions of one’s own social circle are “everyone” and that people who disagree do not exist is not a persuasive argument for anything.

Part of me thinks that the files are weakened by including baseless allegations from anonymous tips and that it would be better to have some hard evidence for this. But another part of me doesn’t want to have that hard evidence emerge because I dread seeing how many people will flatly deny or even try to justify or excuse it.