But why bother holding back in the first place. If this is whistleblower information like Boeing safety issues, there's no point in setting up a dead man's switch. You want to release it all immediately in the first place, because keeping it to yourself undermines the point of blowing the whistle
With whistleblower information, why hold it back in the first place? Wouldn't it be better to release it immediately if they might kill you either way?
I'm sure I'm one of these folks you would "just ignore" but that seems like a weird position to take.
So let me ask you, which scenario is better for social media: a) a group of people who hate to see AI content habitually downvote the content they don't think should be in the feed, b) this same group comments on every AI post, complaining that it's bad content, or c) telling these users not to express their opinion at all
While I'm not against AI content, I do think the crowd that is aren't wrong to feel that way and to want their votes heard. But rehashing the same arguments on each post won't help anything.
In short, the social media landscape has changed since old school "netiquette" rules. Usenet and bulletin boards didn't even have a voting system. We can express opinions without derailing the discussion already taking place. This is a better scenario.
Votes are a part of how we as a (larger) community decide what content is good or bad. We shouldn't be discouraging voting, just like users shouldn't be weaponizing votes.
It's the only way Lemmy is going to get anywhere close to a default feed that is appealing to new users. This "spend anywhere from an hour to a month curating your feed" is not working for most social media users, just us technically inclined folks who don't mind that.
As someone who has had 8 different cats over the years, I can verify this is not necessarily true.
In my experience it usually meant the cat preferred running water over standing water in a bowl. Sometimes it meant the cat didn't like the size or shape of their bowl.
Sometimes it means your cat is a defiant nut who doesn't like things you put out for him, but will gladly drink out of the dog's bowl, a glass of water, or the toilet.
O'Brien didn't do much improvising on the Enterprise. It was a big reason why he took the position at ds9, he wanted something that actually took cleverness and ingenuity to make work.
Like a hodgepodge of Cardassian and Federation technology.
Incidentally, Rom was the one making makeshift solutions more of the time. O'Brien had resources available to solve his problems, but Rom learned by using whatever materials he had on hand.
Voyager, in contrast, at least had the recycle bin enabled.
I would remind you that it seems to be very common in Star Trek episodes to forget how reading data works. When the doctor was first outgrowing his program, they had to use up the "diagnostic hologram"'s program to repair his. Apparently they didn't understand backups at the time. And when Ed Begley jr downloaded a bunch of data from Voyager (including the Doctor) it deleted the original.
On the other hand, the existence of the backup Doctor in the Warship Voyager episode shows that they finally figured out a way to copy data without destroying the source.
Gelsinger was hired as a known long time engineer, rather than as a business expert. I would trust his numbers from an engineering perspective, even though I was laid off under his rule
Ezri got it right about the Klingons. In Enterprise, Martok told us that the younger generations all wanted to be warriors,. In ds9, Klingon lawyers saw themselves as warriors, on the battlefield of the courtroom.
Cultural evolution is weird, and in retrospect, not always right
This is somehow racist.
You think all Salome Jens look alike, don't you?