same way an LLM is able to produce coherent and convincing sentences by statistically determining what word is likely to follow another

To me this implies that the navigation AI is going to hallucinate parts of its model of the world, because it’s basing that model on what’s statically the most likely to be there as opposed to what’s actually there. What could go wrong?

I really admire your optimism.

Oh, we definitely have a legal system. It’s used against poor people every day.

It’s a justice system that we’ve never had.

Why do you think his first order of business is to court martial anybody who he thinks won’t do his bidding?

because it will just give his GOP opponent ammo to claim “see he’s radical too”.

But they already do that, so why care?

Remember, it isn’t that Trump supporters don’t know what he’s done, it’s that they don’t care.

The thing is that the study with the mice was seriously flawed. There’s been more research since then, which is why we’re getting this announcement now (even though the announcement itself is little more than “oh hey there might be something to this? We definitely need more research before we can know for sure.”)

Well that’s one of the more fucked up and asinine things I’ve heard in a while.

You know countries can refuse aide, right? Nobody is forcing them to accept the money. Because, you know, they’re a sovereign nation with the authority to make decisions for themselves. You even said it yourself

Would our government accept aid from China

China offering us aid doesn’t “usurpe our authority”. How the heck did you even come up with that nonsense.

But hey, believe whatever you want. Me, I think we should take responsibility for the harm we’ve done to the world and offer to make amends in some way or another. I don’t think it’s right to take a shit in somebody else’s yard and tell them it’s their problem. But again, that’s me.

Are you suggesting that we shouldn’t try to solve problems that we created? That if we create a problem, intentionally or not, that we should just say to the world “ok you deal with it now”?

Because that sure seems like what you’re saying here.

Why not both?

You’re painting a false dichotomy. We can take care of all these domestic issues, and we can give foreign aide. It wouldn’t even be hard, it would require a small fraction of the military budget or a slight to most increase of taxes on corporations and the ultra rich.

But some people don’t want to give money to poor/starving people, regardless of how much it costs. You could end all foreign aide and all the money would just go… somewhere else that isn’t poor people’s pockets.

Which was always the intent, more or less. It was just kind of a tradition amongst audio engineers to use it once in every film. It had nothing to do with the studios.

Or, they get more money from Russia.

I mean, racists overwhelmingly also deny anthropogenic climate change. It seems silly to be upset at people who are voting against a candidate you want then to vote against, just because they’re not doing it for the reason you want them to.

Read the WPATH Standards of Care. Decisions are made by the child, with the support and approval of the parents and a team of medical and mental health professionals.

If that’s the conspiracy theory you want to subscribe to, I can’t stop you I guess.

I think you’re conflating “gun control” with “taking away all the guns.” No reasonable person is advocating for taking away all the guns, so it’s not a reasonable assumption that “gun control” equals “take away all the guns.”

I think it’s worth noting that the primary reason why the ACA left so many people uninsured is because it allowed States to decline the Medicare expansion, and most of the GOP controlled States did. That should never have been possible; single payer/Medicare for all is the only real solution.

Same in Pittsburgh. The DNC backed the incumbent who was so conservative he ran on the Republican ticket when he was successfully primaried off the Democratic ticket by a progressive. The progressive won the general election too, but the DNC sure want happy about it.

We need additional regulation about profit margins and executive compensation, or something along those lines, to prevent cost increases from being passed on to the consumer when it could just as easily come out of the profit margin or executive compensation.

It’s a good joke, right?

The only alternative is to use the tools we have: let the free market work, but not at the expense of the employees. This means, yes, wage increase will be passed into the customer, who will reduce how much they use the service (decrease demand), which will either drive down supply to justify higher prices or drive down prices to increase demand again. Either option creates opportunities for competitors to enter the market which also drives down prices.

All that said, let me be clear: I prefer option A over option B, but I’m not getting my hopes up.