“Brandishing” a weapon isn’t a crime in Wisconsin. Even if it were, it wouldn’t justify vigilantes attempting to kill him.

I hope these comments make it clear to you that there’s never any off ramp for the “eat the rich” ideology. Once they’ve eaten the very rich, they go after the next cohort, and the next. It’s about pulling everyone down to the lowest level. We have repeatedly demonstrated this many times in many countries over the last century. It always ends in many deaths and fascism. The solution to that is free association, free commerce, and democracy. Individual liberty has plenty of drawbacks, but it’s far better than all of the alternatives we have tried.

Each child born produces as much CO2 as 71 people going vegan for life. That ignores all the other ways humans pollute. Given that 130M babies are born each year, even if the entire planet went vegan right now (forever), it would only offset the next 324 days. If you care about the environment at all, you would focus all of your ire on the the real danger: countries with high birth rates.

However I suspect this has nothing to do with the environment for you. There is a duplicitous tactic employed by vegans which seeks to hijack the environmental movement for moral aims. People such as yourself have a moral problem with eating meat, and you know that many others care about the environment, so you attempt to wed the two. I am of course happy to be proven wrong.

It’s 100% on them. They lost. That’s how democracy works. They didn’t allow a real primary. Their candidate sucked. Their messaging sucked. They ended up with the biggest loss in decades, losing all three branches of government and the popular vote. This is a failure on every level and they don’t get to blame voters.

This is clearly an attempt from the mods to push their agenda. Their replies here in this thread support this theory.

“for me i consider human life sacred and despite the mistakes of this person only God may judge us.”

The dastardly, scurilous, vile agenda that human life is sacred. Well done Sherlock, you uncovered the next Hitler.

Most of Lemmy is far left and very sensitive. You’d have a better time having a meaningful discussion on /r/Politics than here.

If that’s the case, then they’re just criticizing bad writing, like all of us are.

They’re criticising a specific type of bad writing. There are many ways a story can be written poorly. “Bad writing” isn’t being honest about why and how the writing is bad.

That said, there are definitely far right people who regard well written minority characters to be woke. I understand the user above to be explaining that that’s not everyone who uses the term, and I agree.

The judge would immediately shut that down for creative avoidance. This is an order to sell, not break up. The DOJ specifically indicated behavioural remedies in this case, meaning Google must not remain in control of Chrome.

Most male computer uses watch porn and would not want an AI to log that. Many women find porn sickening and don’t understand it and will never understand male urges that result in watching it. The fact that this got into a finished product tells you a lot about Microsoft’s corporate culture.

Excellent point. We saw exactly the same phenomenon play out with Google and Gemini. The tool created racially diverse Nazis. Even a few minutes with the tool revealed major issues. There must have been hundreds of people who witnessed the slow moving train crash in realtime, but were either unwilling or unable to speak out. I think these companies have clearly cultivated a hierarchical culture of fear and intimidation. I recently left a job in which my manager was ex-Google. The stories she would tell were appalling. Her command-and-control style was, frankly, disgusting. She permitted zero critical feedback or discussion. It was her way or “fuck off.” I found that very instructive as to how these companies have morphed into shells of their formers selves. I’m not bullish on the future of these companies. They’re coasting very well on the fumes of their historical successes, and I think their demise is all but assured.

Yeah the concept is pretty damn cool. It’s just horrifying to have a company own and control that data. I suspect this is like Xbox One launch disaster in 2013, in which Microsoft initially required all consoles to have an always-online connection. People rebelled, but today and certainly on our current trajectory, it now looks like Microsoft was just a little ahead of the curve. I think people will eventually become a lot more comfortable with companies owning their data because the benefits will be so enormous. I’m not happy about that future, but I think I understand it.

October 7 has been a full mask off event. Never in my life did I think I would see university students chanting in the streets for Hamas. A genocidal theocratic terrorist organisation which would sooner murder everyone protesting for them than give women and minorities rights. Horseshoe Theory isn’t a theory anymore. It’s real and it’s here.

Yeah fries and soda are an easy ditch. The burger is where it’s at.

Google is on a tear. First Bard, then Gemini, now snippets injected into search results. All spectacular failures.

Some of you people are going to become deeply depressed when Trump wins in November.

Don’t they understand that under Trump, things will be much worse?

Under Trump, things were much better. Housing was much more affordable relative to wages. Food was much cheaper. Inflation was much lower. Illegal immigration was much lower. People are used to politicians lying to them, so they believe what they see and experience. That’s why Trump is now projected to win.

Because they are required to by law in Switzerland, and would face sanction if they did not.

No it was tried as a 1st amendment issue. It needs to be tried as a 4th amendment issue which it actually it.

The Fourth Amendment has been interpreted to exclude not only homeless individuals’ privacy interests, but also their ability to move around in public spaces. The Fourth Amendment only covers police interactions with civilians where there is a seizure. However, an interaction is not considered a seizure when a reasonable individual would feel free to terminate the encounter (Florida v Bostick (1991)). Without a property interest to anchor a homeless individual to a particular location, a police officer’s directive to move along from a public place does not trigger any Fourth Amendment interest, since complying with the order will end the interaction and not deprive the homeless individual of any property (Stephen E. Henderson, “Move On” Orders as Fourth Amendment Seizures, 2008 BYU L. Rev. 1, 18 (2008)).

Ie. Camping isn’t protected under the first amendment act as it isn’t expressive initself which that ruling if you read it makes clear. Essentially by itself it isn’t but it could theoretically be made expressive but that hasn’t be tried.

You can read it here. The defendants argued exactly that. It is the premise of the entire case.

We need not differ with the view of the Court of Appeals that overnight sleeping in connection with the demonstration is expressive conduct protected to some extent by the First Amendment.

They argue at length about the limits of this expression, and the distinction between facilitative and expressive acts. So it has definitely been tried, and has been thoroughly rebuked.

LOL you can’t be serious. They would just be subject to Panamanian court orders.

Yes, and since Panama has a long history of telling foreign nations to fuck off, data is much safer there than in Switzerland. At least as a non-Panamanian. You claim Switzerland is the “most privacy-respecting country on the planet,” but I’d like to see the evidence. Since they comply with every court order, then I would argue one’s data is no safer in Switzerland than most other European countries. Which is to say, completely unsafe from most Western governments.

Someone already tried that in 1984. When homeless activists camped out on Lafayette Square in front of the White House, the Supreme Court ruled in Clark v. Community for Creative Nonviolence that the act of sleeping itself was “facilitative,” rather than “expressive,” meaning that campgrounds aren’t protected forms of speech at all.

It’s not like the technology is a con. Brain implants have been iterated upon for decades. This is just the latest incarnation - after extensive animal testing. I don’t think we have a right to tell a quadriplegic they may not meaningfully improve their lives because we feel the risk is too high. They’re locked in a living prison.