knotthatone @ knotthatone @lemmy.one

Posts

0

Comments

140

Joined

2 yr. ago

Does this mean he intends to retire early?

Absolutely not. Senators believe they are entitled to die in office no matter what happens to them physically or mentally and don't care at all about anything that might impair their ability to represent the interests of their constituents. He might go as far as not seeking to be leader again, but he's not giving up his seat until he's dead.

Not really, no. None of the source material is actually stored inside the model's dataset, so once it's in, it's in. Because of the way they are designed, you can't point to a particular document and just delete that one thing. It's like unscrambling an egg.

What the fuck is going on today?

Interest rates. Loans just got a lot more expensive so big companies are all scrambling to shake down their customers for every penny they can get so they can get more debt off their books.

An increasing number of restaurants are pulling exactly this sort of bullshit--little 3.5% fees at the bottom of the total check disclosed only in fine print on the menu (if at all) tied to COVID, paying their staff, processing credit cards, etc. It needs to end. Pricing should be upfront so customers can compare what they're actually paying, not snuck in at the end.

I'm seeing it more and more. Little "processing fees" here and there, some tied to COVID, some tied to credit cards. There needs to be a clap-back against this behavior.

Deep Space 9: The Prophets are future Bajorans that evolved beyond space & time, which is why they refer to themselves as "of Bajor" and have such a high interest in the fate of its people. The Pah-wraiths are just future evolved asshole Bajorans like Kai Winn & Jaro Essa.

Humans are terrible batteries/fuel cells. And Orpheus said the machines had fusion power. It makes far more sense that the machines were using humans for computing, not basic metabolism. It's been mentioned that this was the Wachowskis' original intention but the suits made them dumb it down for audiences to understand but I haven't found any direct quotes about that.

The two counts are:

1. Is a democrat
2. Is not a republican

OP's not asking about what the incumbent expects. Why would the party itself give voters reasons to vote against their incumbent?

Tough guy bravado is his whole brand and he's pushing a narrative that he's being persecuted. He's using an angry face because he wants his cult to be angry too.

I only flip if the bottom bun is losing structural integrity.

Nuclear power is also very sensitive to the interest rate environment due to the very high upfront costs and financing. It's probably an even bigger difference in favor of renewables now.

I went back in during some of the recent current events to see how the discussions were. Plenty of quantity, not much quality, imo. There wasn't much in the way of thoughtful commentary or discussion that interested me.

The judge has every right to revoke bail and lock him up if he breaks those terms. I'm not betting any money on that actually happening, but if the law were applied equally he'd be denied bail and in prison until trial already.

The plane won't take off. Their pilot's not going to fly internationally without filing a flight plan and they're not going to go on the lam with their client.

It hadn't been until fairly recently (Android 12)

The Secret Service knows Trump's whereabouts at all times. He's not going to slip away from them.

As for the others, even the ultra-wealthy's private jets are easily tracked via publicly available data.

Georgia law also requires that the accused "Poses no significant risk of intimidating witnesses or otherwise obstructing the administration of justice."

I'm really interested in how they're going to address that one given Trump's history of intimidating witnesses, juries and obstructing the administration of justice..

Fortune favors the prepared. Better to have them in your luggage and never need them than to need them and not have them.

My bet is: it’s going to depend on a case by case basis.

Almost certainly. Getty images has several exhibits in its suit against Stable Diffusion showing the Getty watermark popping up in its output as well as several images that are substantially the same as their sources. Other generative models don't produce anything all that similar to the source material, so we're probably going to wind up with lots of completely different and likely contradictory rulings on the matter before this gets anywhere near being sorted out legally.

Copyright laws are not necessarily wrong; just remove the “until author’s death plus 70 years” coverage, go back to a more reasonable “4 years since publication”, and they make much more sense.

The trouble with that line of thinking is that the laws are under no obligation to make sense. And the people who write and litigate those laws benefit from making them as complicated and irrational as they can get away with.