You might already know if you’re into clipping coupons, but a lot of manufacturers have a buy # get 1 free per 12 month deal. Taking advantage of that is often cheaper than buying whatever’s on sale for a particular month, not that you were doing that, just making a comparison.

Edit for clarity: I was referring to pet food. Just realized I didn’t mention that.

I mean, it’s sad that they were more concerned about a lawsuit than the health of the people involved, but that’s just showing that this sort of thing is effective. The exec wanted the request approved so that this very thing didn’t happen, but it was apparently too late. The whole thing is very sad but I’m glad that’s the position the execs had over “lol, no”. The exec wanted it approved so it seems like the request was denied by someone lower down and by the time the exec was informed there was nothing to be done

I’m coming from a US centric place, but I’m pretty sure the N word is generally used to mean a very specific word which is notably not the Spanish word for black. Do people call the Spanish word the N word too in other countries?

I’m not trying to make a case that Israel is somehow the good guy or anything, just that my statement is not related to the fact it’s a Jewish state. Israel is an apartheid state committing genocide. I was just making clear have no issue with Jewish people in general. Lots of Zionists on Lemmy so I was making that clear before it got derailed by bad faith actors. I am not following the Epstein thing that closely because it disgusts me to the point it makes me physically ill, so I can’t chime in about it at all other than to say it’s disgusting beyond reason.

Shapiro backs Israel and Tucker doesn’t. Trump is heavily aligned with Israel to the point that the war with Iran is basically because of them. I think Shapiro is safe so long as Israel sees him as useful.

Not that it should need to be said, but I’m not supporting an antisemitic conspiracy about a new world order or anything. It’s just that Trump and his people are dumb and easy to manipulate and several countries, including Israel, are taking advantage of that. That’s just normal country geopoliticing, not related to any religion or ethnicity.

I absolutely can’t stand it, but realistically it’s often just the appearance of “lower taxes”. I know people who DONT PAY TAXES who want lower taxes. They are stupid and I want to scream. It doesn’t matter how many articles or studies or videos you show them, they just associate republicans with lower taxes and that’s what they want. They don’t particularly care about human rights, or outcomes for citizens, just the idea of lower taxes. Capitalism has made class solidarity so hard. These people have no idea who really has aligned interests and are in a constant bubble of misinformation that they refuse to do even the slightest thing to escape from. You can spoon feed them facts and they will spit them out. It’s like trying to feed a baby, but at least one day the baby may grow up and be able to feed itself. These people are incurious rubes who are ruining the world and are often not the ones suffering most from their decisions, though to be clear, they’re often not benefiting either. Also a bunch of Christian nationalists, and fascists, and run of the mill racist, sexist reactionaries.

Literally allows up to 10% to be AI generated. Charging a fee for commercial use, but I can’t see what that fee is. Feels like a psyop.

Wow. What a terrible idea. There was a woman who was sent to jail in a different state for several months and lost her house, car, and dog because AI misidentified her and cops didn’t give a fuck. Cops should need a warrant for facial recognition at the very least, if it’s allowed at all. Can’t wait for “give me a smile” to be codified into law.

Considering there was a film festival just recently making the argument that the art isn’t political, it’s nice to see his statement.

That’s the opposite of what the OP is saying. The meme version of the story is what misleadingly implied the AI cured someone’s dog. I’m glad you have a better understanding of what might have happened, but it seems like the meme version would have been likely to mislead people into trusting AI for medical advice, at least for their pets. AI is not responsible or capable enough to provide medical advice, certainly not for a population that cannot realistically advocate for itself.

While I understand and appreciate the sentiment, I actually think it’s important for a variety of reasons, the main ones being:

1. other people care (even if just their spouse) and the information can be used as blackmail making them less accountable to actual voters
2. they often use their position to spend taxpayer money on the affairs

Although I don’t care in the general sense, I do think it often decreases their ability to be good politicians.

What a completely accurate description. The nuance of the issues being subtle yet catastrophic is always the part that I find the funniest, because how are they so incapable of seeing how that might be a universal issue? Thank you for the chuckle.

Ridiculous that Grammarly even attempted to do this. The article was good, but at the end, though they hedged, they fell into the same trap everyone seems to. AI is not better at coding than it is at writing and their tinkering with this does not suggest that. Grammarly had a bad product, but realistically, there was likely just no effort put into this aspect of the software. Maybe I’m way off base, and I don’t support AI either way, but I just think it was a poor way to end the article. Programmers think it’s good for art, artists think it’s good for programming, it’s almost like it’s easier to see flaws in a field you’re familiar with.

If you sandbox anything it’ll be safer than otherwise. Not really sure what you’re suggesting. I would still want the code reviewed regardless of the safety measures in place.

I wrote a program that basically auto organizes my files for me. Even if an AI was sandboxed and only had access to the relevant files and had no delete privileges, I would still want the code reviewed. Otherwise it could move a file into a nonsensical location and I would have to go through all possible folders to find it. Someone would have to make the interfaces/gateways and also review the code. There’s no way to know how it’s working, so there’s no way to know IF it’s working, until the code is reviewed. Regardless of how detailed you prompt, AI will generate something that possibly (currently very likely) needs to be adjusted. I’m not going to take an AIs raw output and run it assuming the AI did it properly, regardless of the safety measures.

While I personally don’t like AI, I do think it is changing things. I don’t think it’s ever safe to run code without oversight from an actual programmer, but AI will likely affect the number of programmers being hired in a non negligible way.

I didn’t take it as endorsement and forgiveness at all. I appreciate you posting it.

I couldn’t agree with your point more. So much of the conservative mindset is the fault of black and white thinking. People can’t suggest it’s worthwhile to interrogate feelings about your body. That’s too complicated. They have to either be “pro” or “against” something. The nuances necessary to live the best, fullest lives we can are lost on them, so they take body positivity as anti skinny and pro fat instead of a recognition that people look different and sometimes differences are ok. It’s extremely sad when you think about it.

I can’t stomach reading another entire article about this, but I’m glad they’re being written. From what I read (less than half?) the following is the takeaway just like all the other times:

she says, “I was in love with the frisson of transgression.” The online right had begun to engage more explicitly with forbidden subjects: nativism, race science, and gender essentialism drawn from evolutionary psychology. “There was an element of gnosticism to it,” she says, “the sense that you know secret things that other people don’t know.”

Anna’s discomfort with the right’s sexism grew

It’s all fun and games and just being "contrarian"about race science until you realize that there are people on the other side being harmed by beliefs and actions you only support because it’s “fun”. And the only thing that’s going to make you realize that is being on the other side of it.

These are just people with low empathy and/or intellect, that do not care what they or their friends do or say until it affects them. They are STILL doing these things because it lines their pockets. I want to extend empathy, but I often cannot find it within myself. People who aren’t “true believers” but refuse to leave are just enablers. It’s the 9 nazis at a table. I want to make room for these people, but they refuse to do anything to deserve it. Ashley St Clair has done an ok job, and I hope more women are able to look to that example, but reading this article just upset me.

For what it’s worth, I also tell people that moving to the US at this point is basically supporting fascism. I said the same about vacationing here too. There’s no ethical consumption under capitalism etc etc, but since we’re all participating we might as well do some harm reduction. To me, moving to Dubai signals that you legitimately do not care about how people are treated, not just that you’re unwilling to lift a finger to help, but that you’re actively antagonistic towards the working class. I understand if not everyone feels like that, but I don’t think it’s a race thing was my main point. Mostly a “why are you supporting an even worse state?” thing. For the record, everyone sucks and we should all do better.

Dubai is known for its for particularly egregious rights violations. Other countries have those too, but the article mentions people from the UK. Moving from the UK to the UAE does signal, at least to me, that human rights are not that big of a concern for you. The UK has a 91/100 vs UAE 18/100 “freedom” score. If the same article was about people fleeing Russia or Sudan back to the UK, I imagine there’d be a similar response. But Dubai in particular has a huge wealth gap, so on top of spending money to prop up an oppressive state, they are still able to surround themselves with luxury. I don’t think that’s racist, as much as unfortunate.

I’m not a lawyer, and I did mention in my above comment that everyone deserves the best defense possible, but I’m pretty sure you can say “this is an injustice”, “my clients and I will appeal”, many other things which are not explicitly stating that they are innocent after literally watching one of them rape an unconscious child. This was not in court, and I understand the court of public opinion plays a part in cases, but you’ll have to forgive me if I think this is beyond what is required of a good defense attorney.

Also, I’m pretty sure there are cases (like diddy) where there is a reliance on at least some admission of guilt, and the presumption is that though you may be guilty of a crime, it’s not as severe or deserving of the punishment the prosecution is seeking.