I think they think it empowers them.

Based on the wording I’m guessing it’s a gated community.

I recently freed my 8 year old human child from a gap in the couch.

deleted by creator

Romancing SaGa minstrels song. Made it to the final boss. Eventually made a new save to try again.

Once you beat him once you can carry over some level of progress for successive games. In that same one on maybe my 6th playthrough I had the goal of beating a boss called the jewel beast. Did not accomplish it that run but did on the next playthrough. Beat the game 8 times and never ever could beat what’s called 10 fatestone Saruin.

I don’t know. I mean it’s probably a very bad model and these people are just being scammed for a gpt 3.0. I can’t say I like them but I still abhor a scam.

If only. If you google an AI specifically for litigation you’ll get websites selling weekly access for just shy of $500.

I often get very large pleading dumps immediately prior to a hearing instead of at a more logical time and I think it’s the pro se scrounging the money together for another fix of an expensive AI website.

I sincerely doubt it. Judges want to do justice. I think most people would call having a robot judge your pleadings and dismiss merit less claims as dystopian.

Even if it was just “parsing” that’s a layer between you and the judge. Probably also dystopian.

I can only speak to my field, which is legal. Incomprehensible but prolific drivel has always been something the court system has struggled with getting through. That same drivel is now pretty good at pleading generalities but it’s awful at detailing facts.

You can get past the first hurdle in the legal world and unlock a massive and expensive cascade which AI can also effectively navigate for you.

In essence, AI can, very effectively, take an incoherent unreasonable and often mentally unwell litigant and magnify the expense of getting rid of their frivolous claim by over 100.

It’s almost assuredly going to 1. Chock the system. 2. Force massive reallocation of resources in the judiciary 3. Thereby vastly increasing not decreasing legal work. And 4. End up with valid claims being killed in a massive change in judicial attitude toward “clear enough” pleadings as they struggle with an AI influx.

I love that Bing Crosby just refilmwd the same movie a decade in and called it a day.

My wife and I went out this year and the bill was $200 for a sit down Italian in our suburban town. I don’t even like Italian.

We did a tiki lounge more recently in the city and it was $150.

These are nicer ish places but like, that’s a lot.

You’ve heard of jumbo olives though right?

I just like to watch porn in the shower.

So like picture a bear

Yeah okay one of the most successful and impressive biological families go on

But it eats this weed that’s like everywhere that nothing else can eat

Wouldn’t that like, over populate and dominate the world?

Weirdly? Only on paper.

deleted by creator

In universe the holodeck generates a certain kind of matter that can’t leave the holodeck. So your jizz goes into the holomatter lady who is then presumably disinterested atom by atom just like a teleporter. So your jizz gets dissolved into the ether.

So the story here is that Tyson hired factory workers to man the factory and obstensivlt to care for the animals. The workers hired were undercover agents who then filmed things.

Imagine it was just McDonald’s and someone had photos of it being dirty and McDonald’s went “we hired you to clean it though.” That’s essentially the arguments here.

There’s two added levels of interest. One is a set of laws dubbed Ag Gag which makes it hardened to run these undercover ops. The other is that the people filming are not unbiased observers but instead real zealots for the cause when they enter. It generally creates a real incentive to get a good shot at any cost.

I don’t think there is any question that it was obvious to everyone. I was a kid in a conservative household and got it. And I distinctly recall there being a mad magazine bit about Colbert before I was even in high school. So that implies the joke was widely understood by the child aimed reading audience of Mad Magazine.

Yes?

This post is making me realize the position I’m in and how I got here.

My seven year old has my old switch, and uses that account. He always asks before buying anything and has never bought anything without permission. But he uses my Nintendo account, which is linked to my PayPal, which is linked to my credit card.

This card used to have something like $7000 limit. Last I checked though it’s at 32k limit. I should probably set some kind of spending limit just in case on this setup.