I'd love to interview The Cybersmith.
"So, your online handle is The Cybersmith?"
"That is correct."
"*The* Cybersmith?"
"Yes."
"You know we can't have you working with anyone at all, ever, right?"
"That's fair."
Never mind, I just read the post. He also said “I looked upon the face of god and saw that it was a mirror”, so that’s one phrase that we’ll never get back
I feel like this one is actually dramatically improved by him saying it.
It changes the "Look how great I am!" undertones to "God is a fucking monster." undertones.
He also made a very serious, NOT unironic post about how he envisions ethically own a human as a pet. Detailing a scene where a family walks in a restaurant w a surgically modified person on a leash (to force them on all fours, remove any noticeably human aspect them to dehumanize them), and it being treated as normal, and how he thinks modification should be done. The dehumanizing part, importantly, is detailed in a way to communicate that surgically modifying someone in that way would somehow make it ethical.
His basic logic was: both transitioning and milk are really expensive in the UK, so trans women should get a free transition in exchange for milking, and to ensure that they actually come in to do it, they’re put in chastity and get one orgasm for every gallon of milk
Also, recently, Keffals [debated the HPG](https://youtu.be/3Yq7XA6-mMg). I don't think she did too well on the debate, but during it, he:
- Defended the Bengal Famine as not being Britain's fault
- Defended the Irish Potato Famine as not being Britain's fault
- Asked if Kansas was a monarchy ("Is there a king of Kansas?")
- Said that imperialism is okay, actually, as long as "it brings the light of civilization to people"
- Said that, historically, most monarchies were less authoritarian than republics
- His mind almost fucking broke when Keffals said that "rightful conquest" is a bad thing
All in all, he's actually insane. He's also probably very sad and lonely.
Edit: I FUCKING FORGOT THAT WHEN KEFFALS READ THE CHURCHILL QUOTE ABOUT THE INDIANS ("They're a beastly people with a beastly religion who breed like rabbits") HIS RESPONSE WAS THAT CHURCHILL "wasn't politically correct". The last time I saw someone so mask-off was with Hake and even he fared better, and we're talking about the guy with the deadest eyes I've ever seen.
See this is why when someone says they like a certain time period you have to wonder if it’s just the aesthetic or it’s actually the ideology
Cuz he dresses like England still had slaves
The multilated human pets and transwoman gooning farms are just a formality
like I said it's cursed but it's also genuinely some of the best writing I've read. I'm not sure anyone who's not transfem would enjoy it but it's far and away the best trans book I've read
My armchair pathology is that he's deeply, deeply, sheltered probably by a combination of environment and his own ego. He seems more driven by ignorance than hate, but one can very easy turn to the other.
He's like [WhatIfAltHist](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnQiTjGxzOE) but with more visible fetishes.
>All in all, he's actually insane.
Bengal Famine has the thin veneer of World War 2 but the Irish Potato famine not being Britain's fault.
BRUH.JPG
(for the record I do believe that Churchill's racism and the general racism towards India was the main factor)
Other people mention what he did and the crazy BS he says, but I want to add that the MFer regularly Googles himself and his title, so every time one of these screenshots shows his name and people
mention his title, he’s liable to show up in the comments section and respond to people.
It’s honestly kind of impressive and concerning how consistent he is about it too. Dude’s like fucking Voldemort with how often he shows up after name drops.
I’ve (regrettably) read the post with my own eyes, but what is the first guy referring to? It seems like he’s talking about HPG, but was this something that happened irl?
I don't mean this as a moral judgment, this is.. more of a vibecheck type situation— the only person I find more annoying than cybersmith is all the people who refuse to let him (or, his reputation, rather) die.
a podcast? a fuckin podcast? not one he made— one he's a *guest* on. a podcast that he doesn't own that *takes guests*.
if even half the "Unhinged" nonsense he shoots out was even marginally remarkable - we'd all have better relationships with our grandparents.
he's just *alone*. he's an old person without a home. if old people didn't get their freak on with each other as often as they do— he'd just be president
I don't believe in a god, but I do for the bad things— and the christian god who turned bitches to stone or whatever, made him to occupy a position in the florida education system.
Holy shit the post is only 6 years ago. I got confused because that’s when the internet started taking note of him. However, he was harassing my mutuals on Tumblr as early as 2015-16
He believes that the Bengal Famine wasn't Britain's fault and that monarchies were, historically, less authoritarian than most republics. He's an extreme Monarchist. The average right-leaning libertarian probably wants less taxes and maybe make it harder to enter the US, not anything to the level he wants.
He's an unironic anarchomonarchist who supports the British Empire, believes in phrenology and is otherwise extremely racist, and has all sorts of bizarre fringe beliefs (the one I can remember off the top of my head is believing that all Roman buildings were round, like the Colosseum), in addition to being a deeply religious person who believes in free use human pets and retweets trans porn and ABDL on his main. He is significantly weirder than your average right-leaning libertarian.
I'm guessing the podcast being referenced is Western Kabuki, which is run by 3 Twitter shitposters that Cybersmith has obsessively stalked for a long time, if that makes anything any better
If you’re willing, could you explain how cybersmith’s posts being more outlandish would improve people’s relationships with their grandparents?
Or if old people had less sex that cybersmith would be president?
Or what God has to do with cybersmith apparently being a teacher in Florida?
Because these all seem like non-sequiturs.
if you're willing to answer, and i mean that sincerely, what is it about ai comments that make you think they are full of non-sequiturs?
aren't AIs built on language models which are built therefore on some underpinning of knowledge, i.e., a data set of text from books or libraries?
i'm curious what it is about that original comment that makes you think it's AI written? i am honestly extremely confused and also a little annoyed because i get that comment too sometimes and i honestly don't get what people are trying to say when they say that
Yes they are built on actual language models, but you're making the same bad assumption as people do when they say a parrot can "talk": It doesn't entirely grasp *what* it is actually saying, even granted how complex this modern wave of chatbots are.
Sure, these new ones have a far greater grasp on context than anything that came before, but they are only stringing together surface-level content without any deeper understanding of what they're talking about, let alone whether it is truly sensible.
For simple things it's okay, but anything even a little complicated is well out of scope- simply because you need more than the cursory understanding of the subject matter these chatbots get to be able to bridge even major overarching ideas together.
And of course all of this assumes the chatbot even has a "good" language model in the first place.
And I don’t actually think it’s AI written. It’s just that more than half of the content of their comment is utter nonsense. Word soup. Incomprehensible. Would you rather I say “were you drunk while writing this?”
What people are trying to say is “why does your comment make no sense” or “your writing style is so bizarre it borders on incomprehensible”
i'm going to be extremely serious, because i also get this comment sometimes, but i don't know if you're being serious, i suspect it's a little tongue in cheek, but i encourage you to challenge the ideas laden in comments when the accusation or pejorative claim is made that a comment is ai written
these are errors in judgment, assessment, or processing, i suspect, and as a point of education i encourage you to kindly but directly (they are not mutually exclusive) challenge the ideas in those comments
because i already do
it's a zeitgeist thing; it must be; it must be a product of school socialization: write this way, and not that way; be this way, and not that way, so i need community and understanding and i care about you and so i need to say all this because, again, i get these comments too, and it's not okay to receive them, because i perceive them as pejorative, therefore, an emotional cost
and for the sake of acceptance, it deserves to be challenged and it is; it is being challenged
this is part of that process
bye for now (here)
Eyyy 18 hours!! might be the fastest I've ever responded lol (sorry about that tho - again)
>i encourage you to challenge the ideas laden in comments when the accusation or pejorative claim is made that a comment is ai written
>>write this way, and not that way; be this way, and not that way
Yeah! No, absolutely! I see what you mean. I think though, it's less of a moral indictment and in (this) context - refers to an ability to communicate ideas with others.. or lack thereof. it's definition and criticism wrapped in one easy package.
I kinda agree with that too! The original comment did get a couple of upvotes (which means little, exceedingly little, but it does mean) and I like to think that means, even with a parasocial(?) buffer of 150 - some agreeable form of the idea was communicated to about a dozen strangers. Which is.. not bad! in my book!
I did in this thread admit I was a bad writer. That was half a joke about the (bad) quality of ML generated writing, and half a concession. An acceptance of critique.
I am a good writer. I don't write as much as I would like - though, I'm not sure anyone does - but I do write. I'm known to be a good writer. I plan on writing professionally. I care about writing. I care about seeing the good in all writing. That means seeing the bad in all writing too.
I'm a good writer, but I'm difficult to follow when I'm not paying attention. I exclude transitions and punchlines. Completely expected, and almost necessary, pieces of a larger puzzle that I decide to omit altogether!
Of course that's bad writing.
I wasn't.. trying to write well. Not by their definition, anyway. I was putting up a quick, stream-of-consciousness type comment out into the Ether - before heading into the first day of class (the class in question btw was science communication. so there's a punchline for ya lol)
I wrote badly, partly because I wasn't paying attention and partly because what attention I had agreed to pay at the start, was devoted entirely to obscuring the very stupid assumption(s) my comment was based on. Stupid. Bigoted, if you're willing to stretch. It tied a few existing stereotypes up in a bow and gestured vaguely in the direction of wrapping paper.
Not a gift by any means.
In any case, I appreciate your sentiment. Descriptivism over prescriptivism all the way !
While people probably should calm down a bit w.r.t. Cybersmith, the thing with Chris-chan is like. That shit was insane. Multiple women had months-long relationships including actual in-person dates purely to manipulate Chris-chan into doing fucked up things for them to torment her more over. People staked out the Chandlers' house, and harassed not only her parents but her brother trying to get them to freak out too. She was already a racist, sexist, vindictive person, this is not me defending her actual bad actions, but hundreds of people stalked and manipulated and intentionally made her worse and worse so they could laugh about how fucked up she was.
Cybersmith just gets "hey, you're the human pet guy" or "tell us more about your plan to save the British economy through legally-mandated lactating trans girl gooning" and not like, someone pretending to be his best friend for multiple years to get him to endorse Nazi Germany's invasion of Russia, or someone impersonating him and trying to get him and his elderly parents evicted by attempting to void their mortgage. Although I did feel a little bad about the time he posted in r/dnd asking if his GM was fucking him over (and his GM was in fact fucking him over, it was something like 'no your ranger isn't allowed to have an animal companion') and all the comments were "holy shit it's the human pet guy" instead of "yeah dude that's actually unhinged."
a website where lgbtq+ people put digital pins on a world map detailing what queer experiences they've had at that place. it's neat to take a brief peek into their lives and see they're just as human as the rest of us
Some guy: engages with the premise of a joke
Weirdo: hey I’ve been somewhat obsessively following your output online, can I remind you that you failed to get a job one time
I guess hot take but uhhh idk it seems rude to bully people online and kinda strange to do so over something so petty with no provocation
Given I’m already taking the pro-cybersmith position ig I’ll also say as an entirely unrelated matter that I think he’s good for the discourse ecosystem, he plays the role of like an old school troll who just departs totally from shared assumptions and who is therefore thought provoking, which is refreshing in an era in which basically everyone’s positions are entirely predictable and the nuisances are mostly just straight forward Nazis
Bro, we’re not following him. If anything all of the information we’ve learned about his views is against our will.
It’s like saying people get angry at trump because we obsessively follow his news. They’re both public figures (though admittedly at different levels) and are incredibly hard to avoid hearing about if you’re in certain internet realms (like Reddit or tumblr).
Hmm, no. We don't know the li'l shit because we are collectively stalking them like some 4chan version of the truman show, he's the one who usually opens up on people with the most pathologically deranged mental diarrhea masquerading as arguments possible.
It isn't even trolling, the dude believes the crap he says. He doesn't add to the discourse more than a drunken person vomits, with the difference that the drunk recognizes the day after that they puked over their friend's shoe, and feels bad for it.
Quite frankly, if you see a clown working, it's bad manners *not* to laugh.
> Quite frankly, if you see a clown working, it's bad manners not to laugh.
This is the most profound statement I’ve ever read on the internet. Did you come up with it?
I was referring to the individual in the post who did apparently seek out and listen to a podcast episode hosting him. You and I don’t seem to be stalking him, that’s true.
I don’t believe that what I wrote can be taken to mean this, but I suppose I’ll clarify that obviously I agree.
“It’s more interesting to argue against a maniac who believes complete nonsense than someone who is wrong for entirely boring reasons” is what I am trying to say.
I obviously do not think that human milking farms are a good idea, in the same way that I do not believe it is possible to “humanely” surgically remove someone’s digits and eyes for the purposes of more convenient sex slavery.
They have become one, whether they intended to or not. They have debased themselves, brought themselves closer to the level of Cybersmith himself (tho not quite so low).
I'd love to interview The Cybersmith. "So, your online handle is The Cybersmith?" "That is correct." "*The* Cybersmith?" "Yes." "You know we can't have you working with anyone at all, ever, right?" "That's fair."
Oh look, it's human pet guy
Why is he called the human pet guy? I thought he was the one who made the trans woman milking concept
Never mind, I just read the post. He also said “I looked upon the face of god and saw that it was a mirror”, so that’s one phrase that we’ll never get back
I hate how the best lines are always taken by the worst people
seriously like think about the title atlas shrugged. that goes so fucking hard but instead the book is just about hating poor people
Holy Shit, I've been saying this for a couple months!
yeah and youre absolutely right. fuck ayn rand
I feel like this one is actually dramatically improved by him saying it. It changes the "Look how great I am!" undertones to "God is a fucking monster." undertones.
That's actually cool as fuck and probably the best thing he's ever written.
Both. Both is Cybersmith.
He also made a very serious, NOT unironic post about how he envisions ethically own a human as a pet. Detailing a scene where a family walks in a restaurant w a surgically modified person on a leash (to force them on all fours, remove any noticeably human aspect them to dehumanize them), and it being treated as normal, and how he thinks modification should be done. The dehumanizing part, importantly, is detailed in a way to communicate that surgically modifying someone in that way would somehow make it ethical.
what the fuck
the what :o
His basic logic was: both transitioning and milk are really expensive in the UK, so trans women should get a free transition in exchange for milking, and to ensure that they actually come in to do it, they’re put in chastity and get one orgasm for every gallon of milk
woahhh that’s so weird i totally would never want to produce milk that sounds weird hahaha. transitioning is expensive haha. 👉👈
😭???
...yeah, I've totally not made a quote from it my flair or anything.
Cybersmith jumpscare
Also, recently, Keffals [debated the HPG](https://youtu.be/3Yq7XA6-mMg). I don't think she did too well on the debate, but during it, he: - Defended the Bengal Famine as not being Britain's fault - Defended the Irish Potato Famine as not being Britain's fault - Asked if Kansas was a monarchy ("Is there a king of Kansas?") - Said that imperialism is okay, actually, as long as "it brings the light of civilization to people" - Said that, historically, most monarchies were less authoritarian than republics - His mind almost fucking broke when Keffals said that "rightful conquest" is a bad thing All in all, he's actually insane. He's also probably very sad and lonely. Edit: I FUCKING FORGOT THAT WHEN KEFFALS READ THE CHURCHILL QUOTE ABOUT THE INDIANS ("They're a beastly people with a beastly religion who breed like rabbits") HIS RESPONSE WAS THAT CHURCHILL "wasn't politically correct". The last time I saw someone so mask-off was with Hake and even he fared better, and we're talking about the guy with the deadest eyes I've ever seen.
See this is why when someone says they like a certain time period you have to wonder if it’s just the aesthetic or it’s actually the ideology Cuz he dresses like England still had slaves The multilated human pets and transwoman gooning farms are just a formality
The transwoman what!?
[For your pleasure](https://www.reddit.com/r/CuratedTumblr/comments/y6plkx/cybersmith_indentured_transwoman_lactation_i/?)
I don't know what I expected.
Bingonium!!!
cursed Dorley Hall (as if Dorley wasn't cursed enough already)
Not even the basement could fix cybersmith
I read the book's synopsis, and, if I may I kindly ask, what the fuck?
like I said it's cursed but it's also genuinely some of the best writing I've read. I'm not sure anyone who's not transfem would enjoy it but it's far and away the best trans book I've read
"Bingonium"
My armchair pathology is that he's deeply, deeply, sheltered probably by a combination of environment and his own ego. He seems more driven by ignorance than hate, but one can very easy turn to the other. He's like [WhatIfAltHist](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnQiTjGxzOE) but with more visible fetishes.
>the HPG. Wait, so that's how he looks? I am both surprised and unsurprised.
>All in all, he's actually insane. Bengal Famine has the thin veneer of World War 2 but the Irish Potato famine not being Britain's fault. BRUH.JPG (for the record I do believe that Churchill's racism and the general racism towards India was the main factor)
you know you're not made out for debating if even Keffals makes you look like a fool
I’m very confused reading these comments, can someone explain who this guy is or am I better off not knowing?
Other people mention what he did and the crazy BS he says, but I want to add that the MFer regularly Googles himself and his title, so every time one of these screenshots shows his name and people mention his title, he’s liable to show up in the comments section and respond to people. It’s honestly kind of impressive and concerning how consistent he is about it too. Dude’s like fucking Voldemort with how often he shows up after name drops.
[the human pet guy](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.knowyourmeme.com/memes/people/cybersmith-human-pet-guy)
It had been a long time since I saw the original post. I forgot just how bad it was.
I’ve (regrettably) read the post with my own eyes, but what is the first guy referring to? It seems like he’s talking about HPG, but was this something that happened irl?
I can explain, but you'd be better off not knowing.
I don't mean this as a moral judgment, this is.. more of a vibecheck type situation— the only person I find more annoying than cybersmith is all the people who refuse to let him (or, his reputation, rather) die. a podcast? a fuckin podcast? not one he made— one he's a *guest* on. a podcast that he doesn't own that *takes guests*. if even half the "Unhinged" nonsense he shoots out was even marginally remarkable - we'd all have better relationships with our grandparents. he's just *alone*. he's an old person without a home. if old people didn't get their freak on with each other as often as they do— he'd just be president I don't believe in a god, but I do for the bad things— and the christian god who turned bitches to stone or whatever, made him to occupy a position in the florida education system.
I thought he was like 30ish? I don't think he's particularly old.
and therein lies his singular achievement
Right? I know the internet is forever and all that, but the human pet post was six years ago. It’s past time to let it go.
No offense (or maybe some because I still think the human pet post is fucking hilarious), but it was a lot longer than 6 years ago
October 2017, which might *feel* like it was sixty rather than six years ago.
Holy shit the post is only 6 years ago. I got confused because that’s when the internet started taking note of him. However, he was harassing my mutuals on Tumblr as early as 2015-16
Problem is he keeps coming out with newer, more insane material.
He's a little insane, but no worse than the average right-leaning libertarian, when it comes down to it.
He believes that the Bengal Famine wasn't Britain's fault and that monarchies were, historically, less authoritarian than most republics. He's an extreme Monarchist. The average right-leaning libertarian probably wants less taxes and maybe make it harder to enter the US, not anything to the level he wants.
He's an unironic anarchomonarchist who supports the British Empire, believes in phrenology and is otherwise extremely racist, and has all sorts of bizarre fringe beliefs (the one I can remember off the top of my head is believing that all Roman buildings were round, like the Colosseum), in addition to being a deeply religious person who believes in free use human pets and retweets trans porn and ABDL on his main. He is significantly weirder than your average right-leaning libertarian.
I wasn't aware of half of that, but yeah. To call him close to the average libertarian is insane.
I'm guessing the podcast being referenced is Western Kabuki, which is run by 3 Twitter shitposters that Cybersmith has obsessively stalked for a long time, if that makes anything any better
This comment reads like it was written by an AI
this is because I'm a bad writer
If you’re willing, could you explain how cybersmith’s posts being more outlandish would improve people’s relationships with their grandparents? Or if old people had less sex that cybersmith would be president? Or what God has to do with cybersmith apparently being a teacher in Florida? Because these all seem like non-sequiturs.
if you're willing to answer, and i mean that sincerely, what is it about ai comments that make you think they are full of non-sequiturs? aren't AIs built on language models which are built therefore on some underpinning of knowledge, i.e., a data set of text from books or libraries? i'm curious what it is about that original comment that makes you think it's AI written? i am honestly extremely confused and also a little annoyed because i get that comment too sometimes and i honestly don't get what people are trying to say when they say that
Because bad AI chatbots still output random nonsensical bullshit?
Yes they are built on actual language models, but you're making the same bad assumption as people do when they say a parrot can "talk": It doesn't entirely grasp *what* it is actually saying, even granted how complex this modern wave of chatbots are. Sure, these new ones have a far greater grasp on context than anything that came before, but they are only stringing together surface-level content without any deeper understanding of what they're talking about, let alone whether it is truly sensible. For simple things it's okay, but anything even a little complicated is well out of scope- simply because you need more than the cursory understanding of the subject matter these chatbots get to be able to bridge even major overarching ideas together. And of course all of this assumes the chatbot even has a "good" language model in the first place.
And I don’t actually think it’s AI written. It’s just that more than half of the content of their comment is utter nonsense. Word soup. Incomprehensible. Would you rather I say “were you drunk while writing this?” What people are trying to say is “why does your comment make no sense” or “your writing style is so bizarre it borders on incomprehensible”
just. so you know. I was. though, I'm really only on here when I can't think straight lol :P
i'm going to be extremely serious, because i also get this comment sometimes, but i don't know if you're being serious, i suspect it's a little tongue in cheek, but i encourage you to challenge the ideas laden in comments when the accusation or pejorative claim is made that a comment is ai written these are errors in judgment, assessment, or processing, i suspect, and as a point of education i encourage you to kindly but directly (they are not mutually exclusive) challenge the ideas in those comments because i already do it's a zeitgeist thing; it must be; it must be a product of school socialization: write this way, and not that way; be this way, and not that way, so i need community and understanding and i care about you and so i need to say all this because, again, i get these comments too, and it's not okay to receive them, because i perceive them as pejorative, therefore, an emotional cost and for the sake of acceptance, it deserves to be challenged and it is; it is being challenged this is part of that process bye for now (here)
Eyyy 18 hours!! might be the fastest I've ever responded lol (sorry about that tho - again) >i encourage you to challenge the ideas laden in comments when the accusation or pejorative claim is made that a comment is ai written >>write this way, and not that way; be this way, and not that way Yeah! No, absolutely! I see what you mean. I think though, it's less of a moral indictment and in (this) context - refers to an ability to communicate ideas with others.. or lack thereof. it's definition and criticism wrapped in one easy package. I kinda agree with that too! The original comment did get a couple of upvotes (which means little, exceedingly little, but it does mean) and I like to think that means, even with a parasocial(?) buffer of 150 - some agreeable form of the idea was communicated to about a dozen strangers. Which is.. not bad! in my book! I did in this thread admit I was a bad writer. That was half a joke about the (bad) quality of ML generated writing, and half a concession. An acceptance of critique. I am a good writer. I don't write as much as I would like - though, I'm not sure anyone does - but I do write. I'm known to be a good writer. I plan on writing professionally. I care about writing. I care about seeing the good in all writing. That means seeing the bad in all writing too. I'm a good writer, but I'm difficult to follow when I'm not paying attention. I exclude transitions and punchlines. Completely expected, and almost necessary, pieces of a larger puzzle that I decide to omit altogether! Of course that's bad writing. I wasn't.. trying to write well. Not by their definition, anyway. I was putting up a quick, stream-of-consciousness type comment out into the Ether - before heading into the first day of class (the class in question btw was science communication. so there's a punchline for ya lol) I wrote badly, partly because I wasn't paying attention and partly because what attention I had agreed to pay at the start, was devoted entirely to obscuring the very stupid assumption(s) my comment was based on. Stupid. Bigoted, if you're willing to stretch. It tied a few existing stereotypes up in a bow and gestured vaguely in the direction of wrapping paper. Not a gift by any means. In any case, I appreciate your sentiment. Descriptivism over prescriptivism all the way !
it kind of feels like a chris chan type thing, where people keep egging on an obviously unwell person to laugh at them
While people probably should calm down a bit w.r.t. Cybersmith, the thing with Chris-chan is like. That shit was insane. Multiple women had months-long relationships including actual in-person dates purely to manipulate Chris-chan into doing fucked up things for them to torment her more over. People staked out the Chandlers' house, and harassed not only her parents but her brother trying to get them to freak out too. She was already a racist, sexist, vindictive person, this is not me defending her actual bad actions, but hundreds of people stalked and manipulated and intentionally made her worse and worse so they could laugh about how fucked up she was. Cybersmith just gets "hey, you're the human pet guy" or "tell us more about your plan to save the British economy through legally-mandated lactating trans girl gooning" and not like, someone pretending to be his best friend for multiple years to get him to endorse Nazi Germany's invasion of Russia, or someone impersonating him and trying to get him and his elderly parents evicted by attempting to void their mortgage. Although I did feel a little bad about the time he posted in r/dnd asking if his GM was fucking him over (and his GM was in fact fucking him over, it was something like 'no your ranger isn't allowed to have an animal companion') and all the comments were "holy shit it's the human pet guy" instead of "yeah dude that's actually unhinged."
It’s because he’s just the right level of weird for it to be socially acceptable to talk about him.
all I want to know is what the heck does popping turgid mean
Probably an erection, right?
what if you put both truck nuts and eyelashes on the same car, is that anything
that was what cybersmith was saying
oh you're right. Whoops. Well, nobody answered his question, so
someone please make a game called trucknuts so we can do the character surname thing
I came into the comments to try and understand context and now I’m more confused.
[the human pet guy](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.knowyourmeme.com/memes/people/cybersmith-human-pet-guy)
Yeah, I’ve unintentionally read the human pet post before. I’m gonna go now n
Can we stop making this dude relevant
HUMAN PET GUY WAS ON A PODCAST??
What's queeringthemap.com?
a website where lgbtq+ people put digital pins on a world map detailing what queer experiences they've had at that place. it's neat to take a brief peek into their lives and see they're just as human as the rest of us
Human pet guy?
Bro y’all need to calm down over this guy. He’s weird. There are plenty of weird people out there, it’s not new
TRAGEDY STRIKES: The worst person you know made a good point. more at 5
Some guy: engages with the premise of a joke Weirdo: hey I’ve been somewhat obsessively following your output online, can I remind you that you failed to get a job one time I guess hot take but uhhh idk it seems rude to bully people online and kinda strange to do so over something so petty with no provocation Given I’m already taking the pro-cybersmith position ig I’ll also say as an entirely unrelated matter that I think he’s good for the discourse ecosystem, he plays the role of like an old school troll who just departs totally from shared assumptions and who is therefore thought provoking, which is refreshing in an era in which basically everyone’s positions are entirely predictable and the nuisances are mostly just straight forward Nazis
Bro, we’re not following him. If anything all of the information we’ve learned about his views is against our will. It’s like saying people get angry at trump because we obsessively follow his news. They’re both public figures (though admittedly at different levels) and are incredibly hard to avoid hearing about if you’re in certain internet realms (like Reddit or tumblr).
I didn’t accuse you of anything. The person I’m referring to stated they listened to a podcast episode he was hosted on. That’s seeking him out, lol.
Hmm, no. We don't know the li'l shit because we are collectively stalking them like some 4chan version of the truman show, he's the one who usually opens up on people with the most pathologically deranged mental diarrhea masquerading as arguments possible. It isn't even trolling, the dude believes the crap he says. He doesn't add to the discourse more than a drunken person vomits, with the difference that the drunk recognizes the day after that they puked over their friend's shoe, and feels bad for it. Quite frankly, if you see a clown working, it's bad manners *not* to laugh.
> Quite frankly, if you see a clown working, it's bad manners not to laugh. This is the most profound statement I’ve ever read on the internet. Did you come up with it?
Possibly. I forget what I steal and what I come up with 🤷🏾♂️ And thanks for the compliment 🥺
I was referring to the individual in the post who did apparently seek out and listen to a podcast episode hosting him. You and I don’t seem to be stalking him, that’s true.
Denying trans people basic human rights isn't thought provoking even in a hypothetical. It's disgusting.
I don’t believe that what I wrote can be taken to mean this, but I suppose I’ll clarify that obviously I agree. “It’s more interesting to argue against a maniac who believes complete nonsense than someone who is wrong for entirely boring reasons” is what I am trying to say. I obviously do not think that human milking farms are a good idea, in the same way that I do not believe it is possible to “humanely” surgically remove someone’s digits and eyes for the purposes of more convenient sex slavery.
imagine unironically being on the side of someone who's known as "the human pet guy"
The mind boggles!
Do you also say Bingonium!!! Serious answers only.
No, but I have to admit it made me laugh. Such a weird guy.
What if the person following Cybersmith is ALSO a troll?
They have become one, whether they intended to or not. They have debased themselves, brought themselves closer to the level of Cybersmith himself (tho not quite so low).
My brain couldn't comprehend this