Respectable bipartisan

Kicks over gigglebox every time 🤣

Colonel: You’re reading too much into things.

Rosemary: That’s right, Jack, you’re tired.

Raiden: …

Colonel: Raiden, don’t waste your time thinking unnecessary thoughts. Invest all your energy instead in carrying out your duties.

I have such little hope for the future given the fusion of generative AI and technology advancing faster than our brains can adapt to changing society and conditions. Pretty soon deepfakes are going to be impossible to discern, and then we’ll truly be in a ‘post-truth world’ where nothing can be independently verified

Both. You can use both LiDAR and optical teaming, the technologies complement each other so you don’t fall for a Looney-Tunes ass painted wall, while the camera covers the one-dimensional recognition that LiDAR can’t.

[Tesla] removed radars from its vehicle lineup and even deactivated already installed radars in existing vehicles. This strategy has not yet been worth it since Tesla’s systems are still stuck at level 2 driver assist systems.

I love mine. Combined with adaptive cruise, it’s amazing for slowly rolling traffic, longer journeys, and stop-and-go traffic. I’m under no impression the car is ‘driving’ but having a machine take over the mental load is great and frees up that capacity for other driving tasks and/or awareness of the road.

Tesla calling that technology “Auto” anything without it being genuinely 100% autonomous should have landed someone a fat fine or jail time

Lmao they put lane-keeping assist behind a marketing-wank paywall for their already expensive EVs - something manufacturers like Subaru and Hyundai has made standard across their entire line for years now

What a sad joke this company has become, another example of failed leadership valuing yes-men and sycophancy

Came to the comments just for this, was not disappointed

That’s American, Jewish voters surveyed last fall. 68% support land swaps, an independent Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders, Palestinian return from the diaspora, and financial/population restitution.

A lot of regular people get swept up into the default of supporting the concept of Israel and protecting the lives of the 6-7 million Jews living there, but the topic has so many land mines and risks of misunderstanding that people don’t delve into the topic openly. But if you look for it, there’s a lot of silence from folks who are uneasy about the direction Israel is headed.

Reading the ad’s comments gave me immeasurable hope for the future tho - ain’t nobody except the most lost in the sauce reactionaries/zionists are buying the Likud/Khanist narratives being pushed.

Is it ableist to not define AI art as art, when handicapped people can’t perform the same actions?

Please reconsider this like of argument in the future, it just comes across as cynical using the disabled for arguments sake. There are plenty of blind/deaf/handicapped/motor impaired/etc people making art of various forms. Deaf musicians. Blind painters. Non-verbal writers.

What makes art, “art” is the human creativity of original thought and intrinsic meaning, even if it is derivative. A jazz beat sampled on a rap track is art because it has social/familial meaning - beat makers often unwittingly share their childhood memories listening to their parent’s music at home. A painter may be influenced by their surreal visions, or the war and horrors they witnessed.

If you dare to unpack “the situation” you might understand more of why women ‘give it up’ or just lay there under societal/individual pressure to be sexually available. And yes, that’s an uncomfortable conversation but likely not in the way you’re imagining

I can’t handle the fact that sex is complex and it’s ok to need to work on it and figure out what works for both partners

There’s working on it, and trying to flex on Twitter. After-care is working on it. Discussing go/no-gos or dominance roles is working on it. Asking why she’s not invested is working on it.

“You can’t handle me” is a dismissal I have seen used on the ’alphas’ who won’t take a hint that she’s not interested

Edit: Man the downvotes, y’all really are telling on yourselves

Imagine telling on yourself like this lmao

I am so bad at pleasuring my partner that I have only experienced women tolerating me via starfishing

I see no reason to question why these women aren’t more invested in sex with me; clearly she is a lazy pillow princess and not me who is the problem

Also super gross how we’ve normalized/coerced women into “lying back and taking it” instead of asking why shes not active and engaged

Same. Because if the unions can kill poisonous work demands like ‘crunch time’ and thus cause delays for polish and bug fixes by devs who aren’t sleeping at their desk from exhaustion, we all win

The screwdriver trick is mid imo - you run a major risk of just shearing the filter body wall and now your problem is a leaky oil filter that’s much harder to grasp with other hand tools. Go buy a strap wrench that you can use to install and remove.

Or for the very stubborn filters, these kind of tools are very much a one trick pony that only takes the filter off, but it’s a good trick - it has worked every single time for me.

As Will Be Seen on TV

An even darker joke was missed here by the creator instead of the analog > digital gag

6. Patent pool

The AR market is not just entertainment, Microsoft has been failing to build a viable AR helmet for soldiers for years now, after the latest-and-greatest fight jets got them.

Professional use too - think of how much simpler and safer ‘realistic’ training could be for deep sea commercial divers or oil rig workers. Live schematic overlays for aircraft technicians at work/in training.

Those are a few of the applications where an absurdly high unit cost/license fee would be gladly swallowed instead by governments or business.

Step into the arena, many many people far smarter than you or me have hashed this debate and still have no consensus.

There is no general consensus on the definition of terrorism. The difficulty of defining terrorism lies in the risk it entails of taking positions.

The political value of the term currently prevails over its legal one. Left to its political meaning, terrorism easily falls prey to change that suits the interests of particular states at particular times. The Taliban and Osama bin Laden were once called freedom fighters (mujahideen) and backed by the CIA when they were resisting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.

Now they are on top of the international terrorist lists.

General Assembly Resolution 42/159 acknowledges that the cause of terrorism often lies in the “misery, frustration, grievance and despair” that leads people to seek radical change. The resolution identifies the root causes of terrorism as occupation, colonialism and racism. A definition of terrorism should thus be comprehensive, in order to avoid double standards.

Listened to the first season a while back, I genuinely had one (1) note/dispute, for a series spanning nearly 11 hours on the Iraq invasion. They brought receipts, sources, archived media snippets, and a lot of context that mainstream media still glosses over with 9/11 remembrance justifications.

Very listenable, add it to your queue if you remotely enjoy geopolitics

We can thank Steve for the leaps and bounds that happened in the early 90’s with CGI - tl;dr he was a brilliant animator who snuck in under the radar at ILM and was given run of the animation department because he/his working partner literally invented many of the cutting edge animation techniques, from scratch.

Dude has a tragic story (personality disorder & alcoholism) that led to him being uncredited and blacklisted, pretty well captured in a biopic, worth the hour-ish watch imo.

• The Abyss, 1991 - Academy Award for Visual Effects
• Terminator 2, 1991 - Liquid Metal for T-1000
• Jurassic Park, 1993 - work featured throughout, with the highlight of the T-Rex’s movement and skeletal modeling
• The Mask, 1994 - Nominated for Academy Award for Visual Effect

I don’t understand where or how or why vigilante murder is even brought up here? Who said or implied anything about murder.

The original post is literally about a vigilante murdering the UHC CEO and another company seemingly changing policy afterwards, with OP attaching a comment about ‘not saying it’s good, but maybe violence does work’. You brought solidarity in out of nowhere, and implied it was parallel to sectarianism/tribalism.

That is why I called you out as being obtuse, a vigilante murder is the only reason this comment thread exists - it was there from the very beginning.

I’m merely specifying the easily missed core of solidarity which is that a background of legitimacy is required to have these soup kitchens and co-op farms. The state and it’s “violence” of set rules and consequences must exist as a background before the space can be opened up for these examples you use.

You never mentioned legitimacy - I inferred it. That’s called reading comprehension, not strawmaning. Which is why I posted that legal is not inherently moral. Because enforcing laws, not persuasion or incentives to prompt compliance, ultimately requires a state actor to force that law on another person. And if that person still says “no” then that state actor is empowered to use violence to either make that person submit and follow that law, be arrested, or ultimately killed if they continue to resist. A law prohibiting rape or murder is different than anti-vagrancy laws or occupational licensing - but the enforcement is facsimile if met with resistance.

Quite hilarious to call me the obtuse and myopic one here, when my whole cornerstone from the start has basically been a suggestion to step back and think about what Solidarity means and how it is effectively sustained before we rush in to believing we can so easily make such harsh distinctions between legality and morality or state vs tribalist violence.

This is a good explanation. Your initial comment was half-baked and didn’t expound on what you were trying to say, which is why challenged what I inferred your thrust to be. I’m not foolish enough to believe that we can all live in 100% peaceful coexistence, nightly drum circles, and unlimited cooperation and mutual respect. Because there’s always some asshole who doesn’t want to help or respect autonomy, and becomes the aggressor in order to steal/subjugate/dominate/etc. But my thrust was that the social contract is broken, when a company can essentially renege on a financial contract (heath insurance) arbitrarily and capriciously, and faces no legal repercussions. Because lobbying. Because “business friendly” legal environment where the one with the most money almost wins by default, if there even is a legal challenge.

Please don’t triple strawman me here

I genuinely don’t think you understand what that means, or are confusing presumptive argument for it. It you feel misrepresented and I am straw manning - explain in further detail. Like you just did now, instead of a snarky “u iz strawman winnar”. We never got to that part of the debate initially because you got huffy and left a drive-by comment at the first challenge.