This particular article may be satire, but the topic it's clowning on isn't:

https://theconversation.com/china-is-claiming-the-right-to-punish-its-critics-anywhere-on-earth-288175

This is why I never want to see my country disarm its nuclear arsenal. The workshop of the world converted to drone production is something terrifying to comprehend.

Once again, tabloid phrasing of actual news is not satire.

That AI-generated Winnie the Pooh is so off-model that it no longer resembles Xi Jinping

Worked well enough to get your attention.

You can have your opinions, but…

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/satire

1. the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, to expose, denounce, or deride the folly or corruption of institutions, people, or social structures.

2. a work of art, literature, or entertainment in which the folly and corruption of human beings, institutions, or social structures are exposed, denounced, or ridiculed.

Which one is your country.

My guy, there's no irony in this headline. That's the blunt official position of the Chinese government. Is it even exaggerated? Do you think satire is merely describing bad things?

I can't help trying to fix this. "China draws new twenty-dash line around picture of globe." "China denounces western map borders for implying its authority has limits." "China renews claim to traditional imperial territory of Kansas." It's a PUNCHLINE, god dammit! There has to be a surprising contradiction, beyond the innate stupidity of the truth!

This is a problem for nine out of ten headlines, from your site. Every thread has people going 'I almost ate it!' as if that red flag is the goal. It's like isGlitch rose from its shallow grave, pun intended, to confidently whiff on easy targets week after week. The headline is the part that matters the most - to where a good one doesn't even need an article - and this is the first response where you've broken the kayfabe of laughing off criticism.

What is this site for? Is it just farming ad revenue? That's the vibe of saying 'well the thumbnail got your attention.' Clickbait is not derision, it's spam. Are you actually the isGlitch guy, still waiting to go 'ah-HA, it was an LLM all along!'? If you are genuinely trying to say something, to write comedy, to ridicule and denounce the horrors - you desperately need to focus your effort on first impressions.

I don’t think that you’re the audience for this publication.

I’m sure there are lots of books and movies that just don’t make you happy—but your opinion is limited to the space inside your own head. Lots of people are getting a kick out of our website.

Also, this makes no money. It’s just for fun. How would we make money? There are no ads.

So, in conclusion:

1. We aren’t going to try to please you
2. We do things how we WANT to do them
3. We aren’t ever going to stop as long as people are reacting. 🤎

K, thanks for letting me know in such clear terms that I should block you 👍

Let me be clear: please block this account.

Clickbait, got it.

Repeated detailed efforts to help solve the objective disconnect between your stated intent and the actual text are finally dismissed with big-ass letters saying 'maybe my posts that confuse people are a problem with you.' And them. Y'know, the people confused, in every thread? The folks whose apparently-central reaction is, 'what the fuck I thought this was an editorial.' The kick people are getting is the unpleasant shock of figuring out you were trying to tell a joke.

Good to know it's not for money, but that just makes the cocksure fumbling more confusing. Engagement bait purely for its own sake is not a better use of anyone's time.

You’re weird. You’re the only confused person. So, we can fix this with a block.

Have a lovely life.

Why does that matter?

And how does that apply here?

After looking at this exchange and some of the other things you've posted, it seems like this guy is making some valid points. You're not actually arguing against what anyone says, you're just trying to do gotcha responses or are saying "I'm blocking you".

Just curious

That’s the definition of satire. They say it’s not satire. We say this just isn’t a publication for them.

Right, I understand the exchange. I'm asking you, what part of that headline fits the definition of satire? You keep claiming that it's satire, but like 75% of what you're posting is just bluntly/clickbaity worded news, not satire.

The part where it never actually happened.

Also, if you only read the title, then you don’t get to have an opinion.

Did you read each line of the article?

I mean, it did though. They effectively said that. The article is a little satire-y, but barely.

Also, I'm a human out of your control, so fuck you, I get to have any opinion I want.

I never said you couldn’t have that opinion, but I do not value it and I don’t think anyone else should value it either.

Anyway, this is getting boring and I have a lot of stuff to do so I’m just gonna block this account as well and get on with life. I hope you have a wonderful time!!

The title is the part we have opinions of, you bait factory. People read your headlines and aren't immediately aware it's satire, which is what makes it bad at being satire.

You don't know what constructive criticism looks like.

Case in point: this actually happened. The Chinese government blatantly said they'd punish criticism globally, as a cute little addendum to blatantly saying they'd enforce a monoculture over irrelevant minorities... like the entirety of Tibet. Their defense of this amounted to 'we're already doing it, shut the fuck up.'

Good luck with putting your head in the sand every time someone questions you on why you're calling your shit satire!

Malyca: "I'm confused, this happened no?"

Noxy: "The article never mentions the artist’s name, what the fuck?" abos: "Artists Name and Style is never mentioned." hypnicjerk: "this is bad satire (?)" Dispassionate's ratio'd dismissal: "Not all humor is for everyone. Perhaps you just didn’t get the joke?" hypnicjerk's obvious response: "perhaps you just forgot to make one?"

Korhaka: "Surely it’s someone’s job to know how to do this kind of thing." Archer: "Articles like this are insidious, because you can never be certain."

Ledivin: "it’s so believable that I didn’t even notice!"

SparroHawc: "I hate that I had to double-check what community this was in."

AeronMelon: "Ate this one, too."

humble_boatsman: "How is this satire?"

scops: "I don’t know that this is satire. There’s no wit or layers to it. Its more like dystopian misery porn?" eodur: "Isn’t this already actually happening?"

HubertManne: "oh man. this is satire. ugh." Me, in fact: "This headline sounds too much like it’s riffing on a real attempt I’d somehow missed."

Dispassionate giving the game away: "Every comment or downvote means we are doing something right." That's literally just trolling.

Nevermind the several people pointing out, it's probably all generated, which explains the first-draft vibes... and lends credibility to this being isGlitch all over again.

you mean, like the whole planet has been subject to US copyright law (for example) for decades?

Images, obviously. Text arguably. Neither of which would bother me terribly if this dingus had any consistent standards. Or I'd at least understand tossing off no-effort content and then shrugging at the lazy misses. But no - they keep up a whole-ass authorial persona, and seem genuinely offended by the simplest push to improve, despite nakedly stating that negative responses are part of their goal. It is time for boot to meet ass.

That's a convention countries sign on to, as a sort of trade treaty. They're still enforcing their own versions of those laws. Some of those versions are real fucky.

What China's doing is unilaterally threatening anyone who criticizes their plan to force the culture of Beijing over the entire population.

Is this written by you?

One of the staff members other than myself did it. But it was written by “us” yes

and they are enforcing that how?

maybe by forcing other countries into trade treaties that make them have local laws maybe?

Or do you think you write "China is big dumb, it's CEO looks like Winnie Pooh" and they put someone with a baseball bat into a plane to show up at your door step? Because that is the only other option here.

No, AI wrote this shit and OP is a lying sack of crap. They refer to the LLM as their coworker.

Fuck off, you ai using twat. You're now blatantly lying.

and they are enforcing that how?

Secret police in foreign nations.

Also, yes, strong-arming other governments.

By comparison - how do you feel about about Israel dictating its own image abroad?

Prove it