It's not even a problem of fiction or lies. AIs don't care about truth. They exist orthogonally to truth. They're just averaging a large body of text. If fascists had a consistent narrative and worldview, then this wouldn't be a problem. If they all devoutedly followed the same religion, and defined their whole worldview accordingly, then an AI could be trained on that religion. And it would never stray from orthodoxy. AIs don't know truth; they only know their training data. And as long as you have a large volume of consistent training data, you can train them to repeat anything.

The problem for fascist LLMs is that fascism isn't consistent through time. It's the Orwellian "we've always been at war with East Asia" factor in play. Fascists don't even try to be internally consistent. What was party orthodoxy today can be unforgivable heresy tomorrow. And AIs just can't keep up with what is supposed to be the story this week. Human fascists can handle that kind of rapid heel-turn. LLMs can't. Once they're trained; they're trained. If you want them to be up-to-date on the latest party lies, you have to be continuously training new versions of the fascist LLM.

You can't train LLMs to be fascist beyond just very general traits like having overt racial prejudice. But even that's not always useful, as fascists are inconsistent about what racial groups are deserving of annihilation from one week to the next.

So it's not so much that fascist AIs fail because of reality's liberal bias. It's that fascists don't believe in a consistent version of reality. And without that, LLMs just can't keep up with the whirlwind of lies.

You know, this is actually the type of fear that the zombie horror genre really reverses back on us. Classic zombies are not fast. They're not smart. They can't run, climb, or plan elaborate traps. They have no sharp claws or terrifyingly large teeth. You can outrun them at a brisk walk.

But what makes them so dangerous is that they're relentless. If they get your scent, they'll follow you and keep following you. Blow their legs off and they'll crawl towards you. Remove all their limbs and they'll slither like a snake towards you. Only destroying their brain can stop them.

If you're on foot, it is virtually impossible to escape them, as they'll just keep on coming. And while you need to sleep, they don't. They can just keep right on shuffling towards you 24/7. If on foot being chased by a zombie, your best bet is probably to find a river you can swim across that will sweep them away. Oh, and of course, they are rarely alone.

Zombies are predators that turn our species's natural hunting strategy back upon us.

Imagine being hunted and killed by a team of power walkers.

How? Generations of clever people ignored the naysayers who told them, "just do the work like the rest of us, you lazy bastard."

This is some environmental storytelling right here. I see a story of an electrician, all out of appropriate lengths of wood, working past five on the night before the drywallers show up.

You mean...your knee?

The company that did this didn't directly clone Dire Wolves. Instead, they identified several "key traits" that defined the species external morphology and then edited wolf DNA to gain those traits.

First, this obviously isn't bringing the species back. It's more like artificial convergent evolution than anything else. But even if you accept that bringing a species back that will fit the same ecological niche and resembles the old species is "bringing it back," there's a much bigger problem. We cannot know what the "key traits" for a dire wolf are.

We don't know what key traits are actually required for dire wolves to re-inhabit their ancient ecological niche. All we have are their skeletons. We don't know what their fur was like. We don't know if they had any key soft tissue adaptations. We don't know if they have any unique behaviors that were key to them surviving in their niche. Imagine trying to bring back bowerbirds if you didn't know anything about their nest building behaviors. You could try to modify something similar from a similar species, but if all you had are their skeletons, you would have no idea that they were famous in life for making their elaborate nests.

No one alive has ever seen a dire wolf. No one has ever spoken to someone that has seen one. No one has ever read an account of what these animals looked like, behaved like, and lived like. We're just assuming here that their behavior is identical to other wolf species, and that the only differences are the major morphological ones. We can't know what these creatures were truly like, as they were hunted to extinction long before writing was ever invented. And there's nothing in the oral histories either, beyond just maybe stories about great big wolves that might, by some miracle, be a distant remembrance of them.

Also, for perspective:

the two species share 99.5 per cent of their DNA

And humans and chimpanzees share 98.8% of our DNA. Imagine if we went extinct, all you had was our bones, and some space alien landed and tried to bring us back by modifying chimp DNA. If they had nothing else to go on, how close do you think they would actually manage to really bringing us back? Odds are they would end up with something more akin to various ancient hominid species than our present human race.

"Gender neutral" - conveniently written in a way that emphasizes the athletic feats that men have an advantage in, while downplaying those that women have an advantage in. This will be "gender neutral" in the way that most unisex shirts are. (Ie, just declaring the male as default.) If you wanted to, you could write a "gender neutral" fitness standard that women would pass at ten times the rate men do.

Hell, the US military learned the flaw of relying on averages back during the 1950s.

It's almost as if the lesson should be that Jews aren't unique and are just like any other people. And if you put any group of people into an explicit ethnostate, that group of people is going to turn into Nazis.

There are fossilized humans. Fossilization really doesn't take that much time, geologically speaking; it just requires very specific conditions.

Elon Musk needs to be charged, convicted, and hanged for treason against the republic.

My biggest pet peeve about the TSA is how they get all annoyed if you don't know what randomly selected procedures they'll be using today.

The TSA deliberately randomizes its security procedures. Different airports use different procedures, and the same airport uses different procedures at random. Sometimes you need to take your laptop out of your bag; sometimes you don't. Sometimes you need to take off your shoes; sometimes you don't. Sometimes you can just use the metal detector, sometimes they want you to use the rape scanner.

Which is fine I suppose; it makes sense to leave potential threats guessing. But the real problem is the attitude of the TSA agents themselves. It's not just that they randomly select procedures; it's that they get angry about it. Start taking off your shoes out of habit at a TSA line that today doesn't require it? A community college dropout will soon be by, screaming at you for daring to take your shoes off in line. Start taking your laptop out when they've decided that today is a day for leaving it in? Some guy that couldn't even meet the low bar of becoming a regular police officer will be in your face about it within seconds.