This is just a story of two greedy profit chasing parties fighting with each other. Fuck em both.

IT? Clue? … I didn’t even know he was in those, but I certainly know who he was. Maybe it should just be best know for being an excellent all around actor. That should be okay.

So I do find this kind of interesting. The feds can’t tell a state how to run their election. But usps is a federal entity. So I don’t see why trump can’t tell them not to handle ballots. I don’t like it, but I am not really sure there is sound legal recourse.

The amount of loss here is magnitudes larger. And the difference is that companies like twitter and amazon ran at a loss while they poured money into infrastructure that they get to keep, and use. AI companies are spending most of the money on consumables. Depending on which, they will have some server assets and such. But when the bubble bursts, those wll be worth a lot less as everyone will be trying to offload them. Also, twitter wasn’t riding a bubble.

As few as… likely meant anywhere from 70 to 7000. The ranges on such predictions are usually very wide. Also, sure, 70 people could get lucky and not get wiped out. But the odds are strongly against them.

Um… 400 years is rather low. Even for optimal. But realistic is more like 1000’s.
Hitlers idea was to keep killing the people with the wrong genetics for as long as it took. Hand him nukes and he could clear people a lot faster at the cost of getting some of those he wanted to keep. I bet he would have been willing to trade. Mars… no idea what you are talking about. No one has ever suggested mars could outbreed earth. Muslims… the fearmongering I hear is that they will pollute the culture by bringing their own. Don’t need to outbreed for that. And mixing of cultures is a good thing, not a bad one. That is the real reason those people are wrong.

If by make more money, you mean get more investment capital from the wealthy… they can. And those people who have their money in these companies when the bubble bursts will lose a very large portion of it.

Depends on what you send as a prompt. <evil grin>

Aren’t they taking a loss on every AI operation? Like a big loss. So use enough, especially free versions, and you will drive them to bankruptcy. Lol

Spoken by someone who has no idea what I am talking about… but great job making my point.

You did uncover an important point. One I discuss with doctors commonly. If their treatment plan is something I can’t practically do, then it isn’t a good plan. For example, I have significant adhd. If the treatment plan calls for a midday pill, that just isn’t going to happen consistently. My adhd ensures that. Most of the time they have no other options. The medical system assumes everyone is sane and nuerotypical in the treatments I designs. So now imagine someone with pill anxiety.
So just because she didn’t do what the doctor’s said, doesn’t mean their plan was realistic and transfer all the guilt to her.

In a society where everyday, people are trampled on by a corporate first policy… they feel a need to try and strike back. So they do. Sadly it actually gives many of these horrible people joy to be mentioned at all. And it actually enables them.

Yes, both sides. The one cannot exist without the other. We have all seen how hard the democratic party fights against any progressive candidate that wants to make real change. And when the dems are in control, they do nothing to protect us from the GOP. Even when it is favored by the majority of americans. They are enablers.

Oh gotcha. My obscure point there was intended to be that if it is all called rape, but in some places, some of those thing categorized as rape aren’t illegal or even abnormal (child marriages for example). Then when people here rape their first thought will be “what sort of rape”. Better terminology can change that first thought to “what a bastard” in more minds for more cases.

Yeah, but that law depends on the local jurisdiction. In the us, by state

The post litterally contained “why is the press inventing the term…” I mean it is right there inviting a terminology discussion. But also, the lack of proper termonology has given defenders of rape an argument to distract from the crime. I want that taken away, and I want it clear what they did so people don’t just wave their hands and say… “but was it really”…

Also… I would argue many 18 year olds aren’t mature enough for a lot of decisions. Yet magically, convincing one to have sex is no longer a crime. The brain doesn’t finish developing until the early 20’s. I a, not saying the age of consent should be 21, just that it’s a nuance our terminology and laws don’t cover well.

I disagree. Take statutory rape, it doesn’t distinguish enough.
If some 30 year old person ties down a fighting 5 year old and… straight to the gallows. If a 18.5 year old has consenual sex with a 17.9 year old, the gallows seem a bit extreme. But they are both statutory rape technically. Better terminology would make it easier to assign even harsher penalties than are already assigned for the base case. And they could remove some of the wiggle room it gives judges.

True, but better terminology would still help ensure proper punishments. Take statutory rape, it doesn’t distinguish enough.
If some 30 year old person ties down a fighting 5 year old and… straight to the gallows. If a 18.5 year old has consenual sex with a 17.9 year old, the gallows seem a bit extreme. But they are both statutory rape technically. Better terminology would make it easier to assign even harsher penalties than are already assigned for the base case. And they could remove some of the wiggle room it gives judges.

The only thing I defended was the news people making up thier own terminology in the absence of terminology with enough nuance to capture the details… Take statutory rape. It doesn’t distinguish enough.
If some 30 year old person ties down a fighting 5 year old and… straight to the gallows I say. If a 18.5 year old has consenual sex with a 17.9 year old, the gallows seem a bit extreme. But they are both statutory rape technically. Better terminology would make it easier to assign even harsher penalties than are already assigned for the base case. And they could remove some of the wiggle room it gives judges.