I predict that they will be as effective as Extinction Rebellion : lot's of noise, some protesters arrested and no results.

Rebellion by the incompetent will not lead anywhere

Good luck. It's hard enough to get into a data centre when you're authorised to be there.

We need broad antifa action????(++_

It's not human written, it's LLM.

I find that the first paragraph tells a better narrative. I prefer it muchly. The second paragraph doesn't make sense and is saying more than the first. It feels both dumbed down and more confusing.

They’re saying that the popular conception of a “Butlerian Jihad” is a pale shadow of what Frank Herbert outlined over the course of four novels, all of which are… look, have you read any of them? Whatever virtues you care to ascribe to Dune, “succinct” is not one of them.

I strongly prefer the original to your edit.

The author did not say they felt horror, nor fear, nor misunderstanding.

They winced at repetition and predictability, and they let the reader experience their own emotion that followed.

As well intentioned as it is, these kind of edits subvert the author's intent -- and in this case, also erases evidence of a culture that uses apostrophes for quoting.

Why not ask an LLM to summarize it for you if you don't have the patience to sit with some prose for a bit.

I disagree, I thought it was well-written.

Its' greater sin in my view was attempting to present simple pedantry as politically relevant. The literary criticism I found enjoyable, convincing, and devoid of actionable political insight.

Maybe he should run it through AI to get a more readable version.

Your proposal does not mean the same thing as the original paragraph.

Style is a thing. Your version is not better.

Why would you argue yours is better?

Your version is considerably worse, and imo, more verbose. It misses a multitude of subtleties that the author packs into a single phrase, and frankly, doesn’t even come close to saying the same thing.

I chalk it up to an American technical class who consider the height of good writing to be an O’Reilly book.

But they didn't reveal the existence of ufo's in any sense that anyone would ever be interested.

Especially because the ufo's they did "reveal" have always been known and acknowledged. The term ufo has always been a term of art, stolen by conspiracy theorists. What's been revealed has strengthened the term of art, not the conspiracy theorists. Why would anyone be interested in more of the same?

It is kind of hard to "awake proletariat" if you advocate mass genocide aganst them. In past the revolution were ususlly in favour of majority, not againet them!

I don't think this is true at all, if anything, the tone is "c'mon, guys, you're better than this".

"Butlerian jihad" comes from a science fiction novel from 1965 (Dune, by Frank Herbert). They didn't know about current political correctness 60 years ago.

Fun fact 1: "jihad" does not exist in Villeneuve's "Dune" adaptation.

Fun fact 2: what happens after The Butlerian Jihad? Return of the empire!

Even if? It’s from a book if you’re wondering. We’ve all read it.

I think the word has been twisted a bit, to compare it to holocaust is imo insane. I've known people named Jihad.

This essay does call Brian Herbert a failson so I don't think he's endorsing those books

This is a great example of commenting on the headline without reading the article.

I'm trying my hardest at local vc