Agreed 100%.

Iâ(TM)m not suggesting we criminalize ideas or the expression thereof, Iâ(TM)m saying they shouldnâ(TM)t be engaged or acknowledged as something worth discussing.

How would you constructively debate someone who believes certain ethnic groups shouldnâ(TM)t exist or should be property?

Israel is freeing the shit out of those people.

I reject the idea that all viewpoints should be tolerated and treated as valid and worthy of debate. It is a cowardly position that inevitably enables atrocities.

No, they said that about automation, and they weren't wrong, it just largely missed white-collar jobs. Until now.

What, did you think Citizens United would only allow conservative organizations to conceal their funding sources?

I maintain that boast remains objectively true (yes, in spite of Biden's decline) every time your guy opens his fool, lying mouth.

It speaks volumes about who MAGA looks up to as their thought leaders, and it's perfectly on-brand that those people are as easy marks as their followers.

Let's start with Russia.

Sounds to me like a lawyer trying to get their name out there on a first-of-it's-kind suit.

Good luck trying to establish a shred of causation if it's public knowledge that the kid intentionally thwarted safeguards. And then you have to convince a jury or a judge that tricking the AI into talking about suicide is what led to the kid going through with it.

It sounds like hogwash, so it's got about a 50/50 chance of succeeding.

This isn't a technology problem, it's a law problem. The law is supposed to stop authorities from searching things outside of the scope of a warrant. The law is also supposed to impose penalties when authorities fail to operate within their legal bounds.

In short, "stopping them" is the entire point of the 4th Amendment.

I miss the page-widening posts.

This is about permitting, not funding.

"Shocked" isn't the word.

This is the "party of small government" at work, getting out of the way of business, correct?