We will never truly know how many dimensions the Chess game has.

Say it with me, now. As we all know, the infamous saying goes:

A COMPUTER
CAN NEVER BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE

THEREFORE A COMPUTER MUST NEVER
MAKE A MANAGEMENT DECISION

It's really incredible how marketing departments can radiate amnesia like this with such proficiency.

Meanwhile in reality per-pupil spending in the US is some of the highest in the entire world and it's far left policies like abolishing phonics and claiming expecting the right answer in math is "white supremacy" that lead to this, because a neurotic and ignorant population is easier to radicalize.

You're ignoring evidence of outright wrongdoing and egregious ethical violations and pretending it's mere "political leanings". You think you're a centrist but you're not, if the BBC's own internal ethics review isn't enough for you that's ipso facto proof of just how far left you are, all without realizing it. Your ideas of what "left" and "right" are have been skewed that badly.

Your post is a perfect example of circular reasoning. No matter what evidence you're given, no matter what argument is made, you can always circle back to where you started. You've got a way to dismiss and handwave everything away, usually by personally attacking the messenger rather than engaging with the evidence.

And your post is clear projection.You're treating logical fallacies like this is harry potter and all you have to do is recite a magical incantation to vanish away all the evidence that you're wrong about the quality of the BBC.

The irony of someone ranting about "genocide supporting Bari Weiss" is palpable. If you want to see what genocide support looks like go read the BBC, Associated Press, Al Jazeera, or the New York Times. Bonus points for the NYT as well since they still proudly list a pulitzer prize they won for genocide denial during the holodomor.

Agreeing with your prejudices is not the same as "reliable and objective".

When you yourself are extreme left then everyone else looks like they're extreme right. The BBC's own internal ethical review was utterly damning and shows that they're institutionally bankrupt and corrupt to the very highest levels.

This website is one of the greatest scams online. They squatted on an emotionally manipulative URL years ago and then proceeded to simply declare whatever the owner wanted to be true regardless of the actual facts. Meanwhile because of the name of the website everyone treats it like some kind of oracle of truth, no matter how much evidence there is that it's a scam. By your logic I could go and squat on the domain "mediabiasfactcheckbiasfactcheck" and declare "mediabiasfactcheck" to be far left and wholly unfactual and you would have to accept it as divine revelation.

The BBC's own internal ethics memo damns it as an utterly bankrupt organization. Al Jazeera is state run propaganda from the country that sheltered the leader of ISIS and helped found the organization. It seems like your standards for "good news sources" live in opposite land, or basically boil down to being as anti western and corrupt as possible.

The AP and Reuters aren't a "source of truth", their own reporters have blown the whistle on their malicious lying and propagandizing.

Just say "jews", we all know that's what you mean.

Getting your news from western newspapers, who've been maliciously lying since they denied the holodomor (and won a pulitzer for it), is the recipe that brought us the idiocy of today.

Well, what are you waiting for? Step on it!

(The idiots may also have been algorithms.)

Thank you for taking the time to read all that! You are right, of course. It is something of an unsolved problem with the design. The question of "exactly what work are these draftees contributing?" is something I'm still working on; it may not literally be core parenting or teaching work, but actually more like e.g. hanging out with your cool uncle on the weekend who helps you learn life lessons. Maybe said uncle isn't exactly teaching or parenting material, but he still has something to contribute to building a child's character, and is assisting the parents just by being around to lighten the load. The Big Brothers Big Sisters charity seems to indicate that this is a sound principle with incredible ROI.

There would also be mandatory training to teach people the skills needed to do this work (critical to figure out what goes in there.) Also I'd like to hope that the system would "even out" over a few generations; if we assume the root cause of dangerous personalities like BPD or NPD is being trapped (or in an echo chamber) with a toxic parent figure, the practice of this "socialized parenting" is essentially guaranteeing kids have alternative support networks that can soak some of those traumas. Efficiency would never reach 100%, of course (does it ever?) and there would always be some difficult people for whom alternative credit would need to be devised, but in any substantial system there's always other work to do—maybe a truly broken person contributes by grading homework or something.

You can just say openly that you're an edgy, racist teenager. It's fine; the first step to self-improvement is admitting that you need help.

It seems the pressing the key actually generates Win+Shift+F23... and also function as a Right Ctrl modifier at the same time? It may or may not function normally if you're outside of Windows.

My e-reader works with dick all servers, it plugs into stuff via USB and gets loaded that way. If I want to use a server it ties into my own calibre box.