Wait, if your parents aren't from America you don't get to be president? Being born here isn't enough for you?
Busking boxes? That's pretty grim
Maybe they have a moral objection to human trafficking?
No, I mean lean on corporations. It's a cuts both ways thing, like freedom of speech. Your problem isn't that the government is telling corporations what to do, it's that the wrong people are currently controlling the government. That's all I'm trying to say.
If our government couldn't lean on corporations, we couldn't have rooted out commies as effectively from the media machine as we did back in the good ol days.
Voldemort is first met in chapter 17 of the first Harry Potter book. Over the next 7 years, Harry is saved by Hermione 17 times. 17 years pass between Voldemort's first attempt on Harry's life and the one that was (temporarily) successful. There are 12 uses for dragon's blood (as discovered by Dumbledore), and 5 adult dragons that factor into the plot.
I'm shilling for the first amendment then, and the 14th, as well as property rights. If you want to control Twitter, then you need to take control of Twitter. Until then, they have the right to determine how people on their property use their property.
I'm really confused as to why this is a controversy. I thought people were generally pro-property rights here.
I'm really not, unless you're going to call the entire field of linguistics insanity.
When we call a boat or a building or a country by female pronouns, we are gendering the object/concept. This doesn't magically mean the boat now has a uterus and a womb. Gender, not sex.
Gendering concepts unattached to sex may be only on a specialized use case in English (only specific types of objects and concepts, and overwhelmingly female at that), but it's a natural human phenomenon (personification), and is a core backbone for many other languages, especially the Romances.
Books and comets and Mondays are male in gender, but that doesn't mean they have penises and testes. Tables and chairs and radios are female in gender, but that doesn't mean they can get pregnant and give birth.
Gender and sex are inextricably linked terms, but they are not synonyms. Both words have specific use cases the other does not apply to.
I hope this helps.
Throwing an upvote on this comment is the most important voting process I've been a part of
Your ratio speaks to some disagreement over this
Please do!
The Nazis took quite a lot of inspiration from Americans. Jim Crow laws were cited by Nazi researchers who toured the country (which were mostly passed on for not being relevant to their situation, except for the anti-mixed race laws, which they were quite keen on), as well as our blood purity laws and our military and infrastructural strategies regarding the nations within our borders.
Japan attacking one of our remote military bases was more than an act of war - it was inconvenient. We explicitly declared war on Japan and not the rest of the axis, and it was Germany who declared war on us (because allied). Even while American GIs were storming through France and Germany, we were still making back channel attempts to reason with the Nazis and reach some form of agreement.
After all, Communism was perceived as the bigger existential threat, and the USSR had committed a lot to this fight against the Nazis (and endured a lot on their soil), so if Germany fell and was to be divvied up, they would fight hard for a sizable chunk of her and probably get away with it. Whereas if we could stop Nazi Germany from being completely destroyed by an alliance of disparate nations with very different ideas about the future, but find a way to work with her, that could go a long way towards stemming the red tide, to say nothing of the strategic considerations (Germany's location, access to resources, etc).
Of course, we know what ended up happening. Hitler put a bullet in his brain and Germany was partially controlled by Communists for nearly the next half-century.
It's going to completely change how lawyers and copy writers work. The majority of legal/clerical work is about following pretty precisely prescribed rules and formats, which is what this infant quasi-AI is best at.
The biggest changes are going to come not from jobs lost (for the reasons you describe), but jobs transformed. Meanwhile, each use is data that can be used to hone and progress the algorithms. By the time drone tech is small, stable, and cheap enough, AI will be perfectly capable of taking care of warehouses with light human oversight.
That's when you're going to start seeing job losses in actually scary numbers. The AI will probably get there well before the hardware arrives, but we're probably only about 3 or so decades away.
You're confusing gender for sex.
I don't understand what this means either. "In theory, if everyone played by the same rules"? Everyone doesn't have to set the same rules, that would go against freedom of speech. Corporations have the freedom to set the rules for their property as they like. And they also get to enforce those rules as they like, as long as failure to enforce does not cause law breaking to happen on their property (for example, copyright).
And? What's wrong with a privacy policy? Do you actually have a problem with the government leaning on corporations - (an American tradition that helped us win multiple wars), or is it just you don't like it when it seems to break bad for you?
I am explicitly not shilling for email or any other product, person, or service
Untrue. Adults are absolutely allowed at Legoland. There just is a small section that is essentially like a children's museum. That part requires adults to be accompanied by children, as all children's museums I'm aware of do.
Okay, fair, mistake was probably the wrong choice of words.
I'm a libertarian now? Fun! Gotta go update my socials, I guess.
I truly don't understand anything else you're saying. If you want Twitter to be a Free Speech Zone, it needs to be nationalized. Otherwise, as a private entity, they have extremely broad freedom about how they allow people to use their property. And that includes setting privacy rules.
Okay, so you don't actually want to discuss the tricky finer details of how a society with freedom of speech operates without falling apart, you just want to "win", and then enact the same perceived slights on others. It's not about free speech, it's about power and who is in control. Fair enough, I guess.
https://www.lego.com/en-us/product/everyone-is-awesome-40516
It says 18+ right there on the website
I'm sorry, that only makes sense if the only people you see are performing actors and you literally never run into any real people. Your brain absorbs a lot more than your top-level thought process is aware of. That's why we humans even have intuition.
AI/Deepfakes are right now still just glorified algorithms, but they are sprawling, sophisticated algorithms that have been built up, iteration by iteration over the past 2 and a half decades. They are absolutely getting better at mimicking specific types of human expression. Still complete garbo at creation, and synthesis is still unreliable, but if you want on-demand endless "in the style of"s, AI has you covered. It can easily generate 50 plausible James Patterson or John Grisham titles, Photoshop has been becoming less of an art tool and more a collection of advanced algorithms for years now so it can do that pretty handily, and YouTube is awash in decent-sounding fakes where the living Presidents react to Sonic or play Minecraft or whatever. And that's just what normies are doing with the free stuff available to the public.
Seriously, just go to YouTube and type in "the presidents play", press enter, and scroll for days. Trump is the hardest one for the algorithm to replicate, because his speaking style is more explosive and varied than most politicians (so the computerized cadence is often noticeable as not how the real Trump would modulate his pitch and tone) - but if you didn't know better, the Obama is decent and the Biden can be uncanny. It was just a few years ago the Key and Peele guys did a fake Obama video about this phenomenon, showing how easy it will be to dupe - but they were focusing on the visual aspect, and just doing an Obama impression for the voice. That's now no longer necessary.
I fell through my chair while typing this, so maybe Ted Cruz is already dead and is a vengeful spirit
That's unbearably grim