Oh I’m aware. The amount of screwing over rural residents the telecoms have done and continue to do is massive. Satellite internet helps bridge that gap. But there are better and cheaper ways to do that just by running some more wire. If county governments did their damn jobs for their residents, there wouldnt be as much of a need for satellite internet to supplement the land-based ISPs.

I’m sure it will get better. Just give him a few more goverment subsidies, grants, and 0 interest federal loans to be forgiven later, have the entirely military fleet of humvees replaced with CyberTrucks that he’ll never produce, give him carte blanche to fill more layers of the sky with his private satellites without any oversight, regulation, forethought, or concern for the actual good or needs of humanity, and suddenly your current 3 Megs download may hit 5, even 6 megs in off peak hours! Only an extra $150/month for their premium subscription plan!

I am kind of into the idea of having a little screen on the peripheral of my glasses for a heads up display as an interface with my phone. Or even as a full screen mirror for my phone to be able to browse lemmy or watch video while still keeping an eye on my surrounding. I really can’t imagine why they decided they also needed to have it record everyone secretly.

It was probably those Heard Island penguins framing Trump to get back at him for imposing those tariffs on them.

A lot of us vote on machine, but it also prints a paper copy that is submitted as well. Because the copy is produced by machine, it can be encoded to be directly and accurately tabulated by machine initially, but also can be hand counted, if need be, later. Speaking as a software engineer, exclusively electronic voting is a fucking terrible idea for any number of reasons, like malice, incompetence, good old human error, etc. But we don’t do that. There is and should always be a paper trail to validate it.

deleted by creator

I’m sure you would hear more than a few say something along the lines of 1) ending their life can be done relatively humanely. And it serves a fundamental purpose, for sustenance. While meat for sustenance is not actually necessary, it is considered a basic staple of our diets and generally acceptable. 2) Having sex with animals, though, harms them in a way and leaves them to live with that harm. It can traumatize the animal. It is inherently inhumane. And it serves no purpose but to satisfy a carnal desire, a morbid curiosity, or a sadistic appetite.

I’m not saying that it is an altogether consistent or sound argument. It is something some can rationalize though. But, frankly, I would call either explanation at least a little bit bullshit.

The answer to either their desire for meat or their revulsion to animal molestation is that their instincts give them those feelings. It is evolution. Animal meats and fats are a calorie dense and nutritionally valuable food source that our ancestors have eaten since before humans existed, and we’re mostly wired to enjoy the taste and crave it. A revulsion for sex outside of species helps make sure that we continue to make babies. It’s as simple as that.

Some very few people don’t have one, the other or both of these instincts, but the vast majority do. Most of those people will happily rationalize the feeling that isn’t based in rationality, like above. Some will examine those feelings and rationalize themselves into changing/recontextualizing their feelings or choosing to not act upon them in light of their viewpoint or some virtue they’ve applied to the question. But most just do what feels right and is normalized and don’t ever really truly question it.

And even if you are one of those people who has rationalized themselves into a rationally/morally superior position regarding meat eating, or maybe you never even had an instinctual desire for it, you almost certainly have other habits, values, opinions, etc. that go against every rationality too that just come with human nature.

We’re people. We’re animals. We have intelligence. We have primal drives. Nobody is morally perfect. Nobody can even agree on what moral perfection is. Morality is both subjective on the whole, and objective for each and every one of us. We just gotta get along.

Presumably, you’d buy one when you buy the stickers.

Also, bruh, it’s 2026. There’s flock cameras everywhere, ICE roaming the streets, fascists in control of the goverment… you should probably carry a ski mask when you go out and about.

Those stickers will cover those camera lenses quite well too. And a cheap ski mask costs like a buck.

Buy a roll of those stickers they put on products that is basically impossible to remove without ripping it and always leaves behind adhesive residue. See how much you can cover.

It’s the common legal term now. I am sorry for making you google it though.

That’s just not true, though. This case involves famous people, yes. But the first conviction under the TAKE IT DOWN act, which was passed in May 2025, was only passed down just two months ago in April. It involved no famous people at all. It was an Ohio man who was using AI to make pornographic images of local people in his neighborhood, adults and children, and posting them online on a CSAM promoting site.

Link to related article: https://www.10tv.com/article/news/local/columbus-man-first-convicted-take-it-down-act-pleads-guilty-cybercrimes/530-fff42eac-4089-49ce-847b-0597c8a8fe39

Enforcement under this act is just getting the ball rolling. I expect there will be much more news of it soon.

TAKE IT DOWN Act - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TAKE_IT_DOWN_Act

“Ok, ok. Everyone calm the fuck down. We haven’t actually released the see-through-clothes-a-vision feature. No consumers have access to it, and it’s not yet been decided that we even will release this tech. We’re just developing and testing this personal x-ray tech to explore the possibilities, that’s all! We think it might have great applications for anatomy education, medical exams and law enforcement.”

“Ah, come on. Don’t get your panties in a wad. Yes yours. I can see them getting all wadded as I speak! Don’t you want to be like Superman, but without any of the moral restraint?”

“Besides you’re not allowed to get mad at us until after we’ve actually unleashed this mass privacy violation tech onto the world. If we do end up unilaterally deciding to irrevocably destroy every semblance of modesty, privacy, and personal descretion for sharing one’s own body, we promise, we’ll be completely transparent about it. As transparent as your dress is to these glasses right now. Wowza!”

Socrates was famously called the ‘gadfly’ because he would pester elites by challenging their supposed wisdom. People that would be highly knowledgeable craftsman, financiers, politicians, etc. would then over estimate their knowledge outside of their realm of expertise and claim to be wise in all things. They would know just enough to sound knowledgeable, but really know very little about what they were talking about (related to the Dunning-Kreuger effect). The takeaway of Socrates’ gadfly work is that sometimes wisdom is acknowledging when you do not know something.

AI can have a lot of “knowledge” (it doesn’t actually know anything itself, but rather has pattern training and access to data references). But what it doesn’t have… like at all… is wisdom. It doesn’t understand, literally, anything at all. It might have some guard rails up to limit is hallucinations. It might even say, sometimes, that it doesn’t know. But it is just as happy to ramble on with pure and complete nonsense that is all just a stream of patterns training and probabilistic guesswork. If it has a nugget of data or even an entire library related to your prompt, it will present it to you. But it can 100% just fill any gaps or take the response into tangents that are nothing but guess-the-next-word, probability, looks-good-to-me word salad that can contain several “facts” that are nothing but random word associations from its training with no reference for its basis.

It is a glorified autocorrect. You cannot trust its information blindly, and using it as a tool in this way, especially while staking your fucking law career on it, is goddamned moronic.

It’s not impossible. It’s actually pretty simple. You just don’t give it access to credentials or resources or sensitive information of any kind. Does that make them basically useless? Yep. But then you don’t create massive security risks and legal liabilities with gross negligence either, so… gotta weigh those things against each other.

Refusing to defend yourself is a matter of choice and I have no moral issue with you taking an ass kicking without fighting back if you so choose. Refusing to defend innocents when you are capable, though, is morally reprehensible and makes you as culpable as the one attacking them. While you’re taking your ass kicking, pacifists, I’ll be there doing what I can to prevent it from happening and making your attacker regret it.

Depends. Intentionally omitting information in order to mislead? That’s a lie. Simply not mentioning something? Or not mentioning it because it’s embarrassing for you or someone else, because you didn’t think it was relevant, or because it’s not their business or not your business to share? Not really a lie. Not in the same way anyway.

Probably doesn’t help that this is the first I’ve heard of it.

Can’t really be helped. I was getting a $50/mth stipend for it for about 3 years but then they turned that off.