Ok when I heard about this I thought it was just going to be amusing, but seeing the actual commercial it's a fucking masterpiece.

It's so good there are almost certainly going to be MAGA fans who start accusing Greene of being a secret librul the whole time undermining Tangerine Palpatine.

chef's kiss

I'm sure this will come if the wrong way but if you're genuinely concerned about discovering diversity of thought, you're going to have to tell us what your positions are for example.

I'm all for finding diversity, but so often what people who post these are looking for is an echo chamber. Like if you're really wanting to be challenged, and you're a conservative, go to https://socialistworker.org/ and read up.

But if what you're concerned about is the nerds in Lemmy seem to be left leaning, that's just the nature of smart creative people. We value skills and creativity over hierarchy and structure.

I was with this article until the accusation that the Biden admin "stoked tensions" between Russia and Ukraine. It was Putin who invaded Crimea in 2014 and Putin who started backing and staffing separatists in Eastern Ukraine in 2018 and Putin who was talking about getting the USSR back together in 2020 and Putin who massed troops on the Ukrainian border in mid to late 2021, not even a year into the Biden administration.

It's absolute bullshit to blame those tensions on Biden. Complete brain dead, clownish buffoonery.

I feel like when the attempted coup fizzled out there was a Russia expert who predicted he's be dead within 90 days. Sounds like that guy was right.

Of course they are. They saw what happened when all the kids who grew up watching sesame street and Mr Rogers learned how to think of other people as people and not things. They started supporting their right to exist! As valid individuals! With RIGHTS!?!

Conservatives can only prosper if empathy is suppressed, or at least heavily restricted. You see it every time yet another conservative changes their position on some social issue as soon as they experience whatever it is firsthand.

If they had empathy, they would've already supported the progressive position.

LOL why are they calling it "shoplifting" this isn't some bored kid stuffing a shirt under their clothes. This is an organized raid.

I think it's funny people actually consider that any of these prosecutors would go after Trump if they weren't coming correct.

They have the fucking goods on him for whatever they actually indict on. They probably have decent but not 100% solid cases on at least twice as much, probably 10x as much.

Setting aside for a moment the bastardized definition of "conservative" that has come to exist these days, prosecutors are CONSERVATIVE. They rarely bring cases they might not win. If it's not certain, they try to intimidate the accused into a plea bargain.

Ok, we can pick up the bullshit modern American politics definition of conservative again. Thanks for listening to my TED talk.

Our kids swapped the position of our bowls and plates in the cabinets, and our knives, forks, and spoons in the drawers. They definitely won.

I'll believe this headline after I see their golden parachute details. I'm pretty sure for Forbes 500 CEOs "quitting" can be the most profitable thing they'll ever do.

reddit had given into the "work the refs" strategy of the American right wing. That artificially elevated the voices of the right and suppressed the voices of the left. It's actually the case when you look at surveys and voting behaviors that right wing ideas are abysmally unpopular.

So when we're on an actually free platform that doesn't have an "engagement" based algorithm driving anger and division, with no one putting their thumb on the scale (or people who try getting defederated), "leftist" ideas come up.

The confusion reflected in the OP is the obvious outcome of the post Fairness Doctrine "both sides" media landscape. There really aren't as many right wing people as left wing. We are legion.

I read a pretty convincing article title and subheading implying that the best use for so called "AI" would be to replace all corporate CEOs with it.

I didn't read the article but given how I've seen most CEOs behave it would probably be trivial to automate their behavior. Pursue short term profit boosts with no eye to the long term, cut workers and/or pay and/or benefits at every opportunity, attempt to deny unionization to the employees, tell the board and shareholders that everything is great, tell the employees that everything sucks, ...

I dunno the front page seems way lower quality than it was before we left. Like not just a little.

I basically only go there for the two stupid flash games I play on my phone and sometimes a Google search ends up with reddit as the best answer. Otherwise I don't go. I used to go there dozens of times per day.

I don't think "circumvent" is the correct term to describe this. They did it the hard way instead of the easy way. The easy way is to put up a chunk of nominees and pass them by unanimous consent. The Tube is blocking that by objecting. So they have to do it the hard way, one at a time, I believe with hours of debate, followed by a vote.

I believe it's practically impossible to handle the things that need to be handled (the hours are prohibitive), and it might even be actually impossible (there literally aren't enough hours in a year).

Tommy Fuck-a-duck can go smoke a tail pipe.

Wow Putin must be really feeling the pressure if he's walking all his sleeper agents

I think he's probably just acting

This is even worse logically than the premise of the Trolley problem. You're basically reframing a terrorist or criminal holding a gun to a bystander's head and demanding something trying to say it'll be my fault the person dies if I don't give them whatever they ask for.

No. It's got nothing to do with me (or the judge). The criminals threatening violence are the bad people.

The only good "Trolley problem" rewrite I've heard is the crying baby and the hiding refugees. https://www.truthorfiction.com/crying-baby-ethics-question-causes-viral-controversy/

All the others are either too contrived (how did those people get in the trolley tracks? why is there no driver? why am I able to get to the lever or how do I know a fat man will detail the trolley?) Or it's just a terrorist blaming someone else for his actions. The crying baby one challenges me on a very deep level.

I feel like "lie" implies intent, and these imitative large language models don't have the ability to have intent.

They're imitating us. Or more specifically, they're imitating the database(s) they were fed. When chat GPT "lies" to "cover it up," all it's actually doing is demonstrating that a human in the same circumstance would probably lie to cover it up.

This genie is probably impossible to get back in the bottle.

People are going to just direct the imitative so called AI program to make the face just different enough to have plausible deniability that it's a fake of this person or that person. Or use existing tech to age them to 18+ (or 30+ or whatever). Or darken or lighten their skin or change their eye or hair color. Or add tattoos or piercings or scars...

I'm not saying we should be happy about it, but it is here and I don't think it's going anywhere. Like, if you tell your so called AI to give you a completely fictional nude image or animation of someone that looks similar to Taylor Swift but isn't Taylor Swift, what's the privacy (or other) violation, exactly?

Does Taylor Swift own every likeness that looks somewhat like hers?

How about that, the Republican House "investigations" into Biden "corruption" are completely farcical and unproductive, and the DOJ is in the background finding real corruption and charging it.

It's almost like the civil servants in the US government are working productively and serving the interests of our country and the Republicans are doing nothing useful.

"Noooo it's our algorithm we can't be held liable for the program we made specifically to discover what people find a little interesting and keep feeding it to them!"

Someone should tell this guy that hot dogs exist.

All the media have to do is cover Trump relatively honestly and he will do the rest to sink his presidential campaign.

In 2016 the media were so gaga over his norm breaking and other wackiness and everyone assumed Hillary was a sure thing compared to him, they didn't actually cover him honestly.

Plus he could let people just project whatever hopes and dreams they had on him. He had no governmental experience at any level to investigate and draw conclusions from. He convinced a lot of people that he would fight for them, and Hillary had no really solid counter to all that. Plus the DOJ threw the in-person voting to Trump.

This time we know basically all there is to know about what a second Trump term would be like. Chaos, petty revenge, and burning the Constitution. If Democrats can take that clear and the media can look past all the dollar signs for a second, any half decent candidate on the Democratic ticket will win. Any candidate who can legitimately claim to be for working people and against the elites.

So like a Sherrod Brown, Sheldon Whitehouse, John Fetterman, or Elizabeth Warren. I'd say Bernie but he's probably too old. Brown and Fetterman would do really well bringing large so called "purple" states in.

"show me in my employment contract where it says I have to disclose that"

I've known several people in management in my industry (I've changed jobs a fair amount plus I'm in a consulting industry) who became managers and then either self demoted or moved over to equivalent technical roles specifically because they were forced to basically lie and say their great employees were average or even below average, couldn't give bonuses that matched performance, and couldn't give raises that matched performance.

It literally made them depressed to have to treat hard working people unfairly. So they stopped doing it.

Now that just brought the question to my mind: what does that mean about the people who do that and keep doing it? Are the just psychopaths? Sociopaths? Evil? Trapped?

I think the important thing to do is find the people who are forcing these dishonest review systems and challenge then directly on why they're making managers lie about employees performance. Contact the ombudsman if they have one and point out the dishonesty.

Man I hope they vacate him, too. Only need a few more Republican resignations and the Democrats can take over this year...

I mean, the dogs knew where she was...

Also it looks like she's reading Revelation so that's on brand

The best approach to "free" things is to understand that it's never sustainable. Eventually it will have to become a paid subscription or ad supported or both.

And regardless, you're going to end up being the product if they can discern anything marketable about you from your use of the "free" product.

But just be ready to jump to the next free product.

(Obviously it's possible for there to be FOSS but that comes with some challenges as well.)

I have a feeling she will be successful if they DQ her and she challenges it. Interacting with the bureaucracy of the state we are expected to do what reasonable people would do to comply with the rules and regs, such as follow the directions on the forms provided and follow instructions from officials.

It's unreasonable to expect a person to go digging for extra rules and extra regulations if there is no indication they might exist.

If the form had a place for aliases or prior names, then it would be ok to disqualify anyone who left out a previous name. If there were instructions to provide a list of previous names in a separate document, it would be ok to disqualify. Hell, if the person handing over the document or the website you download it from specifically stated that all previous names shall be disclosed, it would be ok to disqualify.

Most financial documents, for example, specifically ask for that. A lot of government identification applications (passports, drivers licenses, etc) ask for that. So when one encounters a form that doesn't ask for that, there's no reason to suspect that it's necessary.

A good lawyer will have her on the ballot no problem.

Now do the banks and grocery stores and airlines and car companies and farming and...

People went to jail because of Mueller's good work. Is that what your mean by "nothing"?

You may have wanted Trump to go to jail or be forced out of office but there was no chance of either of those given that Trump was President.

How is "despite waiting lists being a record high" on the doctors? That's on the hospitals or government for not hiring enough doctors, probably because they don't pay well enough. The doctors should add "the waiting lists are too long" to their complaints (if not already on there).

You're not going to have a lot of luck targeting areas, regardless of what Internet and checkout lane magazines might claim. Your best bet is generalized diet and exercise based weight loss plus building areas you want to build (arms, legs, butt, chest, whatever).

Or did they just jack prices up so much in their fit of greed that it caused demand to fall...?

The to level comment here is correct that it's more dangerous on average for a woman being abused by a man than the other way around, but you're correct her that Google should just suggest domestic violence help for anyone.

Also these days there are quite a few men out there with husbands...

I remember reading a while back that MAGA counties had significantly higher death and serious disease rates. Probably still do. I'm not sure about the apartment Republican strategy of actually working to kill their core voters, but I guess we'll see how it works out for them.

I guess on balance it's more important to me that the Democrats reject Greene than reject Johnson. It's clear to everyone that Johnson is "weak" (in MAGA support) and dependent completely on Democrats to get anything done.

Now that that's out in the open and he's slightly a MAGA pariah, he'll probably get back to more old fashioned Republican projects like destroying the environment, fucking over workers, giving billions to billionaires, and a blank check to the military.

I mean ... Freedom.

If Trump had allowed his lawyers to mount the best defense they could, he'd probably have a decent chance at complete acquittal or a hung jury.

Instead he forced them to perform a "defense" aimed at his base and maybe some people with "soft" dislike of him and most importantly aimed at hurting his "enemies" and puffing up his ego.

I did hear a persuasive argument that he might be acquitted on the charges related to checks he didn't personally sign (his sons signed instead) but get convicted on the checks he did sign. From what was reported that means it's possible the first 10 verdicts will be "not guilty" and the last 20+ will be "guilty."

I actually sort of hope that's what happens because 1) it will prove the jury wasn't out to get him and 2) he'll be feeling really good for those first verdicts then get gut punched for the last ones.

I wonder how long it will take for 5 or 6 Republicans from strong Biden districts to say fuck it and throw in behind Jeffries?

And is that longer than it will take the Republican conference to get their shit together and vote on a new speaker?

It seems to me like the problem the Republicans have is the Trump faction that has no interest in government functioning at all. If we assume those votes are unattainable, do they even have a majority/plurality?

Can the Speaker Pro Tempore keep the house out of session? If it's "pending the call of the chair," do they still do the daily pro forma session?

Hey, with the House like not actually running, can Biden make a bunch of recess moves? I feel like I remember Pelosi purposely keeping the House technically "in session" to cock block Trump on some things...

Are you comparing a person speaking and maybe even organizing with an actual (presumably armed) revolt?

Because that's ALSO what Russia does (and China). And what most authoritarians do, too.

Unless I missed the part where the Canadian citizen India assassinated in Canada was somehow engaged in active violent resistance in India.

There's international agreements to deal with actual criminal activity, and if there was actual criminal activity that India could prove they should have come after the guy they diplomacy not extrajudicial, sovereignty violating murder.