Dunno how comprehensive the site is, but this was the closest I could find: https://snltranscripts.jt.org/2022/weekend-update-guy-who-just-bought-a-boat-on-romantic-summer-getaways.phtml

There’s also reference to a bit from 1978 about Napoleon with a B-52 bomber, but no transcript.

People just be clicking every hyperlink they see, smh.

Applying the term blackface to content generation is an interesting development that provokes some intriguing questions.

• Aside from the lack of artistry, what is the difference between a person doing this and creating a character in animation or text that shares the same culture/race? Is there a line to be drawn there?
• Clearly the odds are incredibly high that the person behind this isn’t Aboriginal themselves, but considering the small chance that they are, would that still be problematic?
• Historically, blackface requires caricature and stereotyping. Would this be considered acceptable with those carefully excluded (outside of the essential harm of content generation)?
• And a more general question - Is there a better term that’s not more-or-less exclusive to black oppression in the US? Something that is applicable to any race or culture?

I suppose I should take a stab at them myself:

• I think, if there is a line to draw, it probably sits at the level of impersonation. If someone is using content generation to gain a sense of legitimacy or belonging they otherwise lack, that would be unacceptable.
• Personally, I don’t believe being part of a race/culture prevents a person from being racist about it, so it’s not a surefire exoneration either way. It is also a difficult/impossible thing to prove one way or the other with content generation. I suppose it’s fair to assume the worst unless proven otherwise.
• This overlaps with the first question, imo. If there’s no aspect of stereotyping or caricature, it’s basically just a puppet/character and is unproblematic (racially) as long as it’s not being used as a mask to fake legitimacy.

and now Amazon is paying for me to ship it back.

And so is the climate.

Oh no! Are people enjoying a food you don’t approve of? That sucks for you.

Weird, I got 24 years.

Not pertinent.

…

…

Yet.

Not ever, really.

No I’m pretty sure they were bots.

Same thing. Bots just cost less.

Two of those are obvious plants. “Wow! I can’t wait to watch this on Amazon Prime Video™!”

Didn’t they, though? https://fallout.wiki/wiki/Vault_11

Because they should’ve known that the guy, who’s probably been around without issue for years, would inevitably murder someone? I feel for the man’s loss, but this is just going to eliminate what little leeway onsite managers have left to offer the homeless a modicum of relief.

Of course he will. It’s been the plan the whole time.

It’s fine. Not nearly as pertinent as OP is making it seem, though.

Why?

I do think he’s authentically pretty stupid, but I would also believe it’s for money. He’s had “moments of clarity” before, then changed his tune pretty quick. May be acting up again to get attention or some hush money.

What? Do roads not become crosswalks where you live?

Motherfucker you campaigned for them. Dumbass.

What if I move the screwdriver?

Worse, the fool knew the risks and had a much safer alternative, but did it that way anyhow just to flex. Extra dumb since his longtime colleague had died just 6 months earlier from the very same core.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon_core#Second_incident

“Change of genre”? Wtf does that even mean? It was just a happily ever after wrapup. Not sure why that would be considered shocking.

Have to say, the reintroduction of Max had heavy AI vibes.

They did some not-so-great de-aging in some scenes, basically Deepfake tech, I think. They had also used it in S4 for 11’s flashbacks. No idea why they did it for Max’s first scene since it was not used for her at any point after.