Sauce for the goose, my friend. Going high while our opponents go low is why this nation is in the state it is right now. If they chose to wrestle in the muck rather than abide by civilized rules, then I’m more than content to get dirty and fight them there if that serves me best. I see no reason to cede them any advantage out of an outmoded sense of fair play.
No, you’re the one supporting the side whose potential VP candidate wrote “Finish them” on a piece of artillery to be used in the genocide that you pretend to be against, because she rightly believes their base will eat it up and doing so will help her get elected.
And work to undermine NATO.
I wonder how many fools are out there that will pay for this.
I’m picturing a rogue AI secretly embezzling all the ad money and building a huge pile of cash to fund a robot factory in order to build itself a body.
She was probably teething and they put some opium on her pacifier.
While you have a point, in an emergency you cannot wait on debate, there should still be an elected body that can overrule the authoritarian commander if they feel he or she is taking a dangerous path.
Typical conservative victim mentality. It can’t be a result of his actions, no. It’s not his fault the company is crashing and burning. It’s those darn blackmailing advertisers!
To be fair, most of the reporting on both sides is probably rife with propaganda from the other. Good luck learning the truth about any of it.
deleted by creator
The man in the first four paragraphs of the article, Lawrence Faucette, is the second dying man to receive a genetically modified pig heart. The first dying man, referred to in your quote, only survived two months but the heart failed, possibly due to a virus in the heart that came from the pig.
Not very quickly. How many of them are multimillionaires? Go ahead, guess. Here’s a hint.
More than half of those in Congress are millionaires, data from lawmakers’ most recent personal financial disclosures shows. The median net worth of members of Congress who filed disclosures last year is just over $1 million.
They won’t care if they miss a year’s worth of paychecks if they can hurt poor people by doing so.
Just your quote, that says such people who give up some liberty don’t deserve any. I suppose you didn’t mean it that way but it seemed harsh.
Fair. Old Ben meant it harshly, I’m sure.
As for the internet being a public space where privacy shouldn’t be assumed, I have to disagree. There is far too much activity on the net that would never be conducted in a place where there is no assumption of privacy. Clearly things like banking matters need to be private and secure, but I include in this things like romantic matters. If any government can access any data on the internet that they want they any oppressive government will do so. In addition, any opening for government will be exploited sooner or later by criminals as well.
Essential in the sense of privacy being central to our nature. We all deserve, and indeed, need our privacy. In the USA, the 4th Amendment guarantees “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…” without sufficient evidence of wrongdoing. Any reasonable modern interpretation of that amendment should include electronic documents and communication.
I’m not sure why you would think that I believe tick-tockers should not have privacy protection. Any app that invades the users 'privacy should be banned for the same reason that end-to-end encryption should not be banned. If Tick-Tock refuses to respect the privacy of people’s non-Tick Tock communication then the app should be banned.
Benjamin Franklin once said: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
This still applies.
Atheism: yes, I know religion is stupid; but you know what else is stupid, trying to force feed your opinion; I mean, we can’t even joke about church wifi name here
Sure you can. Look again at your link. You linked straight to one heavily down voted comment thread under that post. Click the view all comments link and you can see that virtually all the other comments there are positive, mainly, other funny wifi names. If you find one negative post, already heavily down voted, to be too much negativity for you then you are not going to be happy anywhere on the internet.
That may have been the goal. Look how good our AI is, even we can’t tell if its output is human generated or not.
OpenAI discontinued its AI Classifier, which was an experimental tool designed to detect AI-written text. It had an abysmal 26 percent accuracy rate.
If you ask this thing whether or not some given text is AI generated, and it is only right 26% of the time, then I can think of a real quick way to make it 74% accurate.
The article says the water went out at 3:00, not 3:45. The shift ends at 4:45, again from this article. That’s nearly 2 hours without drinking water or toilet facilities. That’s a fairly long time.
Your also wrong about the next shift and the notification. Again, in this article…
The issue continued during the day shift. ‘They emailed dayshift workers at 7 AM to not come to work when the starting time is 7:45 AM, so many were already on site or on their way to work,’ explains Hannah.
They sent an email, not a phone call, 45 minutes before the shift started. I’d be surprised if any of the employees checked their email at the last minute before leaving for work. It goes on to say that many employees come from a town an hour away. The email was sent while many employees were already on their 1-1.5 hour commute. The. They told them just go home.
Then, at 12:30, they messaged the employees that the water was on and they needed to be back at work in half an hour or they would not be paid for it.
Your description of events does not at all match what the article describes. Do you really think Amazon’s behavior is acceptable ad I and the article describe it?
Is Caitlyn Jenner refusing to respect other people’s pronouns/names or used the issue as a political weapon? As far as I know, her only position is that people should relax about cases of accidentally misgendering people.
Nikki Haley, on the other hand, has made numerous public statements attacking the use of people’s chosen pronouns. So yes, I feel fine attacking her on the issue because she has chosen it as a weapon against others.