>How do you arrest someone in absentia ?

"You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means."

>Come on now, EMacs doesn't deserve to be slandered by being associated with Systemd

I dunno.

Have *you* ever seen emacs and systemd in the same room?

clearly they're the same, just with two names depending upon the audience . . .

and just as I'd grudgingly even accepted sudo itself!

But only a hamster that you don't like.

>when I watch train webcams

uhm . . . is there a lack of paint drying in your neighborhood?

of course, the simple amazon account which doesn't require prime is also 5% back . . .

Nah, it's for the knockoff with a mail-order law egerree, Rube Gader Ginsburg . . .

How do you arrest someone in absentia ?

What's the deal, is it just broadcasting re-runs?

Now let's see your ChatGPT equally compelling Maxist and Feminist critiques of science.

If you actually look at the pledge the content is a bunch of meaningless platitudes. Specifically, it requires

1. Transparency: in principle, AI systems must be explainable;
2. Inclusion: the needs of all human beings must be taken into consideration so that everyone
can benefit and all individuals can be offered the best possible conditions to express
themselves and develop;
3. Responsibility: those who design and deploy the use of AI must proceed with responsibility
and transparency;
4. Impartiality: do not create or act according to bias, thus safeguarding fairness and human
dignity;
5. Reliability: AI systems must be able to work reliably;
6. Security and privacy: AI systems must work securely and respect the privacy of users.

They might as well have pledged to "only do an AI things we think we should do" for all the content it has. If you think that some information shouldn't be released you don't call it non-transparency you call it privacy. When you think a decision is appropriate you don't call it bias you call it responding to evidence and you wouldn't describe it as not taking someone's interests into account unless if you think you balanced interests appropriately. It might as well have said

The only requirement that even had the possibility of a real bite is #1 with explainable, but saying "in principle" makes it trivial since literally all computer programs are in principle explainable (here's the machine code and the processor architecture manual).

I, for one, support the ban of nuyde apps.

Naked apps running around flaunting their bits are just gross!

Put an interface on, for crying out loud. Think of the children!

hawk

blocking enough of google's trackers also seems to trigger this.

one would *think* that after the first couple offices you killed them, the police would catch on . . . but then, I suppose they're sill stuck on the captcha . . .

He was hoping it would work in courts too.