It’s so fricking insane though with what’s said to have been done… a masked person with a gun hops into your car, and you bring them to a police station. That’s… consideration beyond any reasonable action… a point of restraint so absurdly wholesome erroring so far on the side of not killing a potential attacker.

Though realistically of course it’s going to be a greyer area. stand your ground protects you if you KILL a teenager with no without confirmation that they are armed or have any risk to you. But bringing someone who absolutely has the ability to end your life at a moments notice that you can’t identify to the police so everything can be confirmed and sorted out, probably won’t have the same level of protections.

Yeah, was going to say currently you have to do tests on video calls if you aren’t sure, IE currently you need to ask a video caller to do something like, spread out 3 fingers and wave them in front of your face to break AI

You mean prison could be better than the streets… I’d say that’s not entirely false. Kind of based on the raw numbers etc… bottom line we spend more money on dealing with problems caused by people in homelessness (both crimes of despiration, making hostile architecture and policing to keep them swept under the rugs and shoved into the outskirts of town, saving their lives in the ER when they collapse from hypothermia, than it actually would cost to house them).

I mean in short, no paying in non currency is still taxed. Same problem that’s mostly glossed over when say you win a new car on a gameshow or similar, and why in reality the gameshows offer you cash value for the car instead. (because a broke ass family winning a top of the line car that they could never afford, still has to pay taxes on the prize… that they also could never afford). and yeah paying in something that is going up in price, means the company has to budget with either spending all of your sallary up front to buy what they are going to pay you massively up front… or know that they don’t actually know what they are going to pay you, then add in a concept like “at will employment” obviously you are motivated to quit or renegotiate if the price crashes, and they need to fire you or re-negotiate if the price skyrockets.

On top of course of limited goods, because the company buying them will drive the price up further.

You want the winner of seeing how stupid our performative patriotism goes, The ad where they took snippets from a Martin Luther King Jr sermon to sell a car. The double irony, that very same sermon had a portion of it specifically calling out car comercials for encouraging us to want to spend too much money for the purposes of looking better than our neighbors.

What is an instance?

Some don’t like this comparison, but effectively think of lemmy in similar forms to e-mail, IE you can e-mail your friend who uses a different mail service, by adding @whatever.com to their username. the whatever.com in e-mail that’s called a domain usually, but in lemmy that’s considered the “instance”. The only difference is rather than just saying “that’s not an address” lemmy assumes if you don’t specify, you must mean the one where you are.

well yes but generally speaking with regards to porn, the most common time porn is “illegal” is at least currently almost always for reasons that almost everyone would agree on morally. Admitted, the current direction of the US is working on regulating/restricting porn between consenting adults, and just had that abysmal ruling that AI created CSAM is probably OK. Right on the heels of discovery that Grok has somehow trained on CSAM.

Well short term yeah, thing is that’s step 1 to fixing the system… step 1 is getting the facists out of the majority in the supreme court, because without that step done, any further steps will be ruled “unconstitutional”, then comes ethics rules, further checks on the power of the supreme court etc…

I mean it’s fair to say in some movies there’s jarring scenes that pull from the rest of the concept of the movie. IE if you are watching a rom com, and they decide to throw in a 30 minute chase scene, it’s likely to detract from rather than add to the movie. Some scenes bundle well, some scenes bore half of the audience, and would have done better as seperate things.

It’s always fair to complain about parts of a movie that you didn’t like, because the quantity of complaints on the whole either encourages the existing movie makers to shift their movies, or in the best case scenerio, encourages someone else to make a movie more focused on the things you like without the parts you don’t.

Isn’t that like… a trope done on like every beloved sitcom Including the Brady Bunch?

So in other words, AI is just cheap exploited labor from impoverished people, with extra pollution steps.

draw a mural that includes all the things that make santa clarita famous. Of which a google search would have most likely said it’s near the beach, has a six flags, and is a prime movie shooting location.

I think his point is, that’s where the conservatives love to go. IE this image is most likely to be sent in a “we need to cut medicaid and social security” arguement, because that’s what the conservatives do, they fearmonger about the deficate, slash everything that helps regular citizens and allows for the economy to grow in healthy ways, then stop talking about it when it’s time to start a new war or pay for the crap that they want.

And yeah you know how good something is when you push it on people.

Honestly I’m kind of baffled that big tech seems to have such a long history of the opposite working in usage.

IE facebook - started off exclusive to specific colleges, gradually rolled out to all colleges, then to the general population. IMO the long timeframe of “it’s out there but you can’t have it”, was marketing brilliance that made people demand it.

gmail - google announced it on april 1st, to make people think it wasn’t even real, Did a slow gradual rollout in which a relatively small pool could get accounts, then had their existing members be able to invite others. People sold their invites on ebay and similar, the demand was through the roof for them.

Google plus. Now you’d think google having both of those examples would have done the math… Nope "Hey you already have a gmail account, we decided you should use google plus too!, Your account is there. Hey we’ve tweaked your youtube account to use your real name so that you can already be ready to combine it with your google plus account! Hey USE GOOGLE PLUS NOW IT’S GREAT!!!

IMO google plus was as ahead of facebook at the time as facebook was ahead of myspace. Hell I’d still say it’s prime features make it actually usable in ways facebook never became capable of (circles as a core feature was IMO was the thing to make it perfectly usable. IE every post set so you can have friends that say care about video games, or dogs, or have compatible politics etc…, and effortlessly post to that group without annoying or starting a fight with others). But it’s nature of telling people what to do… was a huge drawback. MS’s products are seemingly doing that even more, admitted part of it is just the automatic built in drawback of being “microsoft”, I don’t think anyone hears the name microsoft and thinks “this is going to be a product that I WANT to run”.

But I think the bottom line is, when you are telling the users they want to use it… you’ve pretty much already lost.

I’d say the target audience of newspaper comic Arlo and Janis readers, they were intended to be a boomer comic when the comic strip launched in 1985. obviously like almost all comic strips, the characters haven’t aged so, when the comic strip was written they were boomers in 1985.

It is worth noting that the comic specifically is noted as being kind of a reversal of normal boomer humor, as the normal tropes of comedy in that era was more on being annoyed with your spouse etc… and it more often actually made the relationship mostly healthy.

yup was going to say, greatest problem with design of dating apps. Working is a failure. Not giving hope is also a failure, so the sweet spot of capitalism for them is basically to run like a casino… set up as many people into a game you know they won’t win, with just a sliver of false hope to make them think they can win… while knowing that most won’t.

I’d hope, but basically they are only protecting downloading, for the most part 99% of piracy prosecution has already shifted focus to uploading, and really the focus is far more on the companies hosting etc… because they learned in the napster era that suing grandmothers and children doesn’t really win the PR wars.

They don’t need to be mutually exclusive.

They aren’t exclusive, but they aren’t the same thing, so there’s no real confirmation that a pornstar knows more than your average woman on, enjoyable sex rather than looking like she enjoys it.

Concept of Pornstars teaching satisfying sex is to me on par with WWE wrestlers teaching self defense classes. Sure some WWE wrestlers probably have actual training in that category. But there’s probably more people with just a focus on actual self defense fighting that could do the job better.

yeah reminds me a bit of the quote in futurama about blernsball

“Now Wireless Joe Jackson, there was a blern-hitting machine!”, "Exactly! He was a machine designed to hit blerns!

They make the world worse so their lobbiest friends can make more money. I’d say lawyers are pretty far down on that line. They’ve got shares in big tech, health insurance, Oil, Weapon manufacturing etc… I think all of those are bigger money makers.