The law is unconstitutional, as other similar laws have been found in the past. It hasn't been removed from the books only because nobody has been charged for it in a century, thus nobody has had a chance to challenge it on those grounds. The exception is for the military, which has the UMC which is allowed to have stricter restrictions on behavior.

Do you understand what an NFT actually is? They don't, and usually aren't, sold as a scammy cryptocurrency token. I get an NFT every time I go to a concert and it is a fun talking point when a group of friends share what shows they've been to. It has no selling value and is use for entertainment

There is nothing stopping you from doing it

YEah, none of this will happen. Let's assume they don't have a prenup (in which case the settlement of assets is dictated by that). The wife would get 50% of what was generated during their marriage at best. That may include the house, but its value would be subtracted from what she got in cash. Alimony... depends on a lot of circumstances, but it's more rare and generally a limited time. Plus we have no idea what the wife's income is, she may make as much or more.

Will he get a job again? Of course he will. Probably not as a CEO in the near term, but he'll absolutely get jobs where he isn't a visible presence for the company. And in a few years the CEO jobs will open again, because nobody is going to give a fuck a year from now.

As for going to jail- no. If the alimony (which is unlikely to exist) does exist and it is set high, he goes back to court to get it lowered. Because alimony is based on your income (with a few exceptions for example purposefully staying unemployed). Given that he was just publicly fired, his current income potential is very low, so any alimony would be matchingly low. There are formulas for these things.

So in other words, your just spouting misogynistic bullshit.

VMWare workstation is the best you can get for a desktop virtual machine host

No, it's not. Thinking requires understanding. Machines are incapable of doing that. They can recombine new facts, but they cannot and will never be able to think.

Despite very credible allegations, Biden was never convicted of raping raping Tara Reade. And his daughter's recollections of him inappropriately showering with her outlasted any statute of limitations. But I see where you're going, there. The rest is a good fit, right down to the weaponized government, for sure. The plot twist is that the real kingpins are behind the scenes, using him as a puppet. It's good villain story line material fresh from real life.

The cognitive ability of AIs is 0. AIs do not think. They do not reason. They do not understand. They can probablistically predict output based on training data, and an input, and that's it. With programming, it can find bits of code on the internet that are related to the keywords you give it, but it can't actually code a damn thing on its own. Which makes it a slightly less useful version of stack overflow, and for it ever to become better it will need a quantum leap of new techniques that are not currently on the horizon.

It probably made me 5 times slower because it gets hung up on a stupid thing, misinterprets me telling it what the correction is, does something different, rewrites the whole thing, introduces different issue

I argued with an LLM for about an hour about how to properly escape paths with whitespace in them for passing to AWK. I could have fixed it myself quicker, but I wanted to see just how many times of going 'No, you have to because " it'd take before it'd realize what the actual issue was.

It took a *long time*

"Weather alerts, flood, tornado, etc. should be able to wake people up."

They're already *able* to wake people up. What do you do about people not wanting to be woken up who silence their phones? Do you pass legislation making it illegal for phones to be able to silence certain alerts? Okay, some people will put their phones somewhere other than their bedside so they can't be woken up. Do you make that illegal, or at some point do you just say "Okay, you know what, this is on you"?

Okay, all those alerts saved one life.

And all those alerts convinced a bunch of people to silence their alerts, and resulted in lives lost.

Have you bothered to compare the two numbers to see whether the alerts are, in fact, justified? Or do you always only look at a benefit and ignore any associated costs?

So the only thing the attacks need to steal information from your system is to already have access to the system to run arbitrary code on it. Gotcha.

Not all the world is the US. In the US, you're relatively safe... well at least as long as you were born a US national, it seems we're deporting those who aren't. And we'll see where that trendline goes.

Other nations outside the US and EU? Safety varies a lot. There are plenty of governments happy to punish or disappear protest starters.

Hashcash was thought up back in 1997 for combatting spam.