This is the problem with setting new normals, the other side will go there too. Its never a one time event.
If you are angry about the lack of accountability for Clinton's misdeeds, how much more angry are you about the lack of accountability for Trump's - and the Trump administration's - ongoing grifting, dishonesty, corruption, and un-Constitutional activities? And what steps are you taking to see that the current administration will be held accountable?
Why is it all these earth like worlds exist, but no signs of life ?
There likely is - or was - life on LHS 1140 b. But what are you expecting to find? An image of a little green man waving at us from the surface of LHS 1140 b?
The likelihood that there is intelligent life, capable of responding in a meaningful way to human contact, is very, very, very small, even on an Earth-like planet. LHS 1140 b likely has (or had) some form of life, but the chance that it has evolved at the exact same rate as it did on Earth is really small. Humans have only been on Earth for something like
If you write a book, do you get permission from every author you have read in the past? why not? you book is built upon everything you learned, so clearly they own a piece, right?
There's a big difference between how human authors operate and how LLMs operate. LLMs, by design, use their training material to predict the text that should be placed on the screen given the prompt provided. While it is not reproducing a work word-for-word, it relies on prior works explicitly for any future production.
For human authors, yes, prior reading can inform about structure, phrasing, pacing, etc., and there are genre and common structural elements, unless they are a plagiarist or parodist they are not writing a tweaked-version of the material they read but something new.
Also, presumably, the human authors obtained the books they read legally.
Let the pummeling continue.
Other then the death of a few leaders, Iran is winning this war in pretty much every other way. You want this to continue so Iran can win even more concessions from the U.S.?
..do they pay 53 billions with PayPal ?!?
Yes, but after fees and additional charges the deal ends up only being worth $49.95.
You.clearly have not bought tickets in the last 2-3 years
If the price is too high, I don't go. I'm not the target market for the recent A-list pop music tours, but I have been to some major sporting events in the past two years, and I will say Europe does a much better job of managing the secondary market for tickets than the U.S. They have limits on price increases for resellers, fees are limited for the transaction, there's clear ticket transfer process which limits forgery somewhat...but we can't have that in the U.S. because, *socialism*?
Just wanting to work for a year to save up for his master program
Your local school certainly would hire him as a paraeducator, and while the salary is probably not much more than a movie theater, at least it would be in the general area where he wants to work.
Altogether, the tickets were over $1000
I'm assuming this was face value of the tickets, which has little to do with scalping?
Tours and live events are expensive, and are now one of the few ways popular music acts can actually make money. So they charge as much as they can, and all of the middlemen in the biz also take as large of a cut as they can.
Are you a part of the solution, or a part of the problem?
Competition is good for both Apple and for Android. The existence of cheaper options puts pressure on Apple to keep their price low. The privacy, low advertising, ease of use and high quality build and performance puts pressure on Android producing tablet makers to pretend like they care about those things. If either of these two sides completely wins then consumers lose.
because they will have no food or place to live
Then the "unemployable" could work at growing food and building housing? These are both low-skill, high-labor activities that almost anyone can do.
We need to face it sooner or later: Only talented people are going to have work in the future. Education can enable these but it cannot create them. Whether it is STEM graduates that are actually good (!) at what they do or tradespeople that are. Obviously, some service and entertainment jobs will remain, but these will not make a large difference. Now, how do you design a society where something like 50% or more of the population is basically not employable?
Repeat after me: your job is not your life. Your job is not your life. Your job is not your life.
If people are "not employable," then they can go about their lives spending that time enjoying themselves. Hobbies. Travel. Entertainment. Volunteering. And so on. What's wrong with that? Why do you assume that people who you call "not employable" will have to die in your version of the future? You can have a meaningful, good quality of life without having to be "employed" every waking minute of every day...
Are they unalienable? Hardly, they get alienated all the time. As far as taking rights away, you most certainly can!
Strawman fallacy. I never said rights could never be taken away. In fact, if it can't be taken away, then it can't be given or received, so then it isn't anything at all.
The idea of something being a right means a person should have access to *thing* because they are human; not because they are rich, from a certain race, from a certain country, a certain gender, etc.
If we continue on this track, you won't be allowed to eat meat, as animals will have "rights" as well. We already have some jurisdictions that give "rights" to bees.
Slippery slope fallacy. Saying people have rights doesn't mean that we have to give the same rights to all animals or creatures. It makes no sense for you to say that because children have the right to not starve to death, that somehow means people will be prohibited from eating meat. Nonsense.
Human rights are merely social norms for the times. 1000 years ago, we had different social norms.
Nope. Rights are not norms. There are many places in the world where a majority of the population would not agree with one or more of the rights described in the Declaration of Human Rights.
1000 years from now, we will have different social norms
Perhaps, if there still is society. But whatever it is, people will need to eat, have a place to sleep, to make decisions about their own bodies...those all seem pretty universal, no? I don't get how the idea of adequate nutrition as a basic human right is framed as nothing more than a "social norm"?
Show me where in the American constitution where you have a right to privacy
It is implied in many parts of the Constitution, (https://constitutionus.com/constitution/rights/the-right-to-privacy-in-the-constitution/), and many rights that are explicitly mentioned in the Constitution would be difficult or impossible to achieve without a right to privacy. For example, your right to freedom of religious practices is difficult or impossible to achieve if the government were to listen, record, and track every religious expression you made.
Who gives you rights? This entire concept of "human rights" is very recent
The most well-known expression of human rights is the UN Declaration of Human rights which was approved in the late 1940s after the horrible violation of people's rights during WW2 (https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights). The fundamental premise of this document is that rights are not bestowed by a government or by a leader, but rather all people should have these rights because they are human. And, therefore, any government or leader that violates these fundamental human rights is in violation and should be held to account (which is usually easier said than done).
You have no rights in prison
Incarcerated persons still have rights. There was a significant section of the Declaration of Human rights that deals with incarceration, such as when it may be used, the conditions that incarcerated persons are allowed to experience, and how governments make decisions about who is sentenced.
In terms of privacy, it is not explicitly discussed in the Declaration of Human Rights, but there have been many proposals to include it as an explicit addition to the Declaration.
"Wish not to seem, but to be, the best." -- Aeschylus
