My gut tells me they are not deleted but rather simply no longer publicly available. Can't have these pesky AI bots training for free.
Why is it OK for an American company to headquarter in one state then cherry pick another in which to file a lawsuit? Surely a company should be governed by the laws of the state in which they are based. It seems weird to choose the set of laws you want to be judged by when the defendant cannot do the same.
Wow, that's great!! So I guess all the chemicals coming out of the coal, oil and gas fired power plants will be stopped then.
CO2, NOx, particulates all are chemicals and are all intentionally released during combustion.
On the religion side the last picture should be the same as the first.
How can you possibly think you are on the right side of things as you call in a bomb threat on a school?
I just don't understand how these people can think their tactics are morally justified.
Because you are a kid and you don't know but are pretending to be an adult. Nice try!
Donald Trump thanks you for your support.
Reading the headline I was about to post how ridiculous it is that AI is taking over everything. Then I read that it is being used to give someone the chance to say their own words in their own voice.
This was not motivated out of using AI to replace an actress. It was motivated out of respecting the wishes and dignity of a dying person. It's there a better use of AI than this?
It is pretty simple. Respect your employees and they will respect you. Respect starts with valuing the employee's contributions by paying them a fair wage. It continues with treating them well. A way of treating them well might be a point ping table, but that comes on top of a fair wage, not instead of.
A good manager might recognise a hard working team needs a way to relax and gets a pool table or something. The employees are happy and tell their friends they've got a pool table at work, everyone is jealous. It seems like the pool table is the reason but it is just a symptom of them being generally treated well.
Maybe if they weren't destabilising the world, their citizens might feel happier about bringing children into it.
It's not "famous" that should be in inverted commas, but "artist".
"Your trial subscription to module: 'breathing' will end in 30 days. If you'd like to continue your subscription please accept the new terms and conditions and link your payment method using the following link."
P.s. I know neuralink cannot do this... Yet
How do you know they are wrong?
Just kidding
Upper mgmt "We need our employees back in the office." Lowrt mgmt "Did you see the numbers? Since our employees started working from home, we've been smashing targets." Upper mgmt "Yeah that's why we need them back. Just imagine how much better the numbers could have been if we were making sure they weren't slacking off."
One of the most important things in a tool line this is long term stability. Unity just showed anyone intending to use their engine they are not a stable choice. I wanted to use unity for a recent project and found unreal engine terms more acceptable for my use case before these changes. Now there is no competition.
I don't think it's really fair to include "Biden" alongside "Bush" and "Clinton" and NOT include "Harris", just to make a point. The point is the Bush and Clinton represent two people each, a dynasty as it were. Biden is just one person. You might as well add then Harris since she has served as VP just like Biden, or Trump but I get the feeling this is intended to somehow make the statement that Harris represents a new breed of politics, a break from the old. That may or may not be true, but it doesn't hinge on this meaningless metric.
"since 1981 there has never been an election without a Bush, Clinton, Biden, Trump or Harris."
I'm sure the answer would be: "Yeah but they couldn't have foreseen how the modern world works 2000 years ago. We need to adapt to the ti... Hang on did you say we can have slaves again?"
Ok so can we start with a really rough day of policing election fraud, inciting insurrection, business fraud, not paying suppliers, sexual assault, stealing classified government documents, and shitting your pants in public. Then maybe the word will get out and we won't have to go further.
... Ok maybe not the last one. That's just unfair.
"Let me tell you why I claim to support trump."
The real reasons would never be spoken aloud.
He's speaking from personal experience. He knows how many crimes he committed last year and is extrapolating to the wider population.
The problem with conservatism though is that their voters will think this is a good thing. Taxes are bad full stop, so these companies are clever by lowering their tax bill. They don't see that the salaries are obscene. Then they complain about public services and infrastructure being bad.
Just because you don't like her music doesn't mean it's mediocre or that you are somehow more evolved. When it comes to personal taste, how do you decide who's opinion is the right one - like you have taken it upon yourself to do and gate keep 'good' music. Her music is undeniably popular and all of those people who like it would disagree with you about it being mediocre. So what makes you right and them wrong? There is no objectivity when it comes to things like music, only subjectivity.
Before you jump on me and label be a Taylor Swift fan, the big reveal is, I'm not. I have no problem with you saying "I think her music is mediocre" but that is different to saying " her music is mediocre" the former is an opinion, the latter is trying to paint an opinion as a fact.
This comment will probably not be received well simply because so many people seem to dislike Taylor Swift on here and will miss my point. Taylor Swift is irrelevant to my point, sub in any band or artist if you need to understand that.
They've also not been fine.
SUID Death rate for infants has decreased even since 1990. Baby monitor likely had a role in that.
FYI not supporting subscription for features a device has in hardware, just saying I'd rather have a monitor that never went off than no monitor and a dead child. There are plenty of alternative devices without subs that cost a lot less to begin with.
Your point is what? That 100% of the people voted for them? Or that those who opposed them should silently fall in line?
Sorry, they absolutely should protest and they absolutely are entitled to.
Am elected government shouldn't have carte blanch to make changes designed to rig the system in their favour.
Even then you can still have someone read the source and write a spec for a second programmer to write a library. The programmer never saw the source code but it was still useful. Still legal to do this. If someone dumped original source into the projector could be similarly checked for duplication without breaking the law.
I happen to have seen a documentary that says having 100 is not only possible, it gives you superpowers https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Cqd-_fHdTyA
"Politics of me" beats "politics of we" once again.
It's not hate. It's fear. Fear of the confusing thoughts in their heads.
I did online dating for many years. I used match, eharmony, tinder, pof, okcupid.
I fully understand the 'soul destroying' comment. For me it was a lot of work for little return. I started off being selective. Messaging one person at a time so I didn't end up getting two responses and having to put someone off or turn one of them down. That was naive it turned out as I got very few replies. So I started messaging multiple people at once. I always tried to personalise things but my effort varied with how optimistic I was feeling about online dating.
Ultimately I think I got responses about 10% of the time. From them, 10% turned into a date, from those maybe 50% would get to a second date.
So overall it every hundred messages I'd write , 1 would end up in a date. I went on quite a lot of dates over the years, but I had to devote so much time to getting them it was, soul destroying.
I never thought i was unattractive, but online dating made me question if I really was. I never thought I was an ass, but online dating made me question if I really was. I would sometimes have very long conversations before meeting to find there was no chemistry in person. Sometimes I would like them when we meet and they would ghost me. Sometimes they liked me and I didn't like them, but I always tried to be honourable and tell them, not ghost them since I didn't like it happening to me.
I am male in case my experience doesn't make it obvious. I often spoke to some of the women I got on better with about how online dating was for them and their experience was pretty awful for different reasons. Generally they were bombarded by messages and a good number of them were obscene. Guys trying to hook up rather than date. To manage their inbox was a real challenge and they probably missed out on good matches because of the noise.
My overall impression of the whole thing is that it generally sucks regardless of whether you are the one doing most of the messaging or whether you are receiving messages. I also think it makes it more like shopping than dating, dehumanising people. Do I want the 8K 42 inch TV or the 4K inch TV? Actually, can I even afford it?
All that said in the end it worked for me. Over 6 years since I last logged in and I think it was a bit of an addiction, or perhaps desperation born of loneliness.i also have a daughter now and there were times I thought that was never going to happen.
So for me online dating was years of frustration, difficulty and upset, but in the end I'm glad I did it but it took a long time.
Agree that if an incident happens in a particular jurisdiction, the local court should handle it. That makes sense, no argument here. But here they get to choose the set of laws because there was no physical location? That just feels wrong somehow. Anyway there is a physical location and if anything, the incident was 'perpetrated' by a person who was physically located somewhere at the time. It should be handled by the court local to them at the time. In the case of organisations, I guess this would mean where the defendant company operates from. Or if we accept it is virtual and everywhere then, it should be governed by federal laws not state laws.
No, in a system that has been gerrymandered and uses the electoral college system to favour a party (Republicans) that wins power while losing the popular vote, voting outside the two parties favours that party.
Real fascism is what you'll likely get by allowing Trump back in.
They wanted the IP not the staff.
Isn't a big part of the problem how the police respond rather whether they decide to or not?
I love to see free speech absolutism being so unshakable.
You reap what you sow Desantis.
Consequences are a bitch.
So basically upset that the press do their job??
IMO the main reason for the press to exist is to hold people in power accountable for their actions. It doesn't matter the lengths they go to to get the information or their motivation. There will always be press looking into politics on both sides of the spectrum and we as the public should be glad for it.
You should not excuse bad behaviour just because they are on your team. You should encourage the press to do their job as long as they don't go too far into harassment, distortion of the truth or digging up irrelevant personal details about someone that affect noone outside that someone.
I really like the line "democracy does in darkness" because it is so true. Political figures who dislike the press generally have something to hide.
I don't think you support him intentionally.
It's called having your cake and eating it too.
He gets to claim he is against government spending but also protects his voters with relief money and he can vote against the funding because he knows it will very likely pass. If there is no disaster he can claim to be fiscally responsible, and if there is one, he can say that the voters wanted it so they should get it.
I say funds like this should be assigned according to a priority based on these votes. His district would get the scraps and leftovers if anything and they could squarely blame him for it. It would stop these guys paying politics with things that directly impact their voters lives or get voted out.
You think the only reason people could find destructive, violent behaviour to be unusual or difficult to understand is because they have no passion in their own lives?
I'm just a little sad that there are people in the world who have grown up in such violent, loveless homes that they can't conceive of finding violent behaviour over a sports game disgusting.
I wonder how many of wives and partners who get the shit kicked out of them when their passionate "alpha" male's favourite team loses would agree with you. Oh it's OK, he had just lived such a full, passionate life that he sometimes loses his self control for a moment.
Vote for Trump, defeat demons.
Pick one