Comment Re:WTF? (Score 1) 160
** uncommon
** uncommon
"Incel" is not referring to a man without a woman. It refers to a specific toxic community in that state.
Maybe not blaming people on a self-help site would have helped them not to radicalize
They self-radicalized long before the word "incel" entered the common parlance. Which is what happens when you create an echo chamber of a bunch of angry lonely men and base post visibility on engagement.
Why do I care what the UN's preferred wording is?
You made a false claim about the origin of the terminology. You should care about being factually accurate.
The correct and proper legal term in the USA is "illegal alien"
It literally is not. That term, while it exists in the US code, is incommon. The most common term in the US code is just "alien", and when specifically discussing the undocumented, "Unauthorized Alien". I didn't include a discussion of US code just so you could pretend it didn't exist.
And I'm sorry if you don't like being called out for wanting cheap, exploitable labor to pick your damn cotton,
I'm struggling to understand what your argument is. You seem to be declaring that any job involving cotton is inherently slavery, even if the people are free to come and go as they choose and are paid for their labour. If that's not your argument, then please clarify, as otherwise, I'm baffled.
Democrats want cheap labor they can exploit.
Democrats (aka, the party that is constantly pushing for bills for higher minimum wages and mandates for better working conditions, while the Republicans do the opposite, pushing deregulation) want above all a regularized system with rules and oversight to prevent abuses. Most also want a path to citizenship for people who work for a given number of years with no criminal record (7 years is a common number suggested, though even decades would be better than "never"), though this is secondary to the primary issue. What Democrats do not want is a masked gestapo kidnapping people who want to be in the US working, from in front of their children, and throwing them into "Alligator Alcatraz".
These things are the exact same thing that the immigrants themselves want. You can't sit here and pretend to be an advocate for immigrants when arguing for policies that they are opposed to and opposing policies that they support.
Just about every car owner I've talked to plans on selling their vehicle or trading it in, in a few years.
That's not surprising at the moment, once they've had a chance to drive anything recent with all of the automation available. When you can just let the car do most of the work for things like bumper-to-bumper traffic, motorway driving, etc, it's hard to go back to the endless manual slog of older cars. Presumably at some point things will plateau, if they haven't already, and people will be happy hanging onto ten-year-old vehicles again because there's no big incentive to upgrade, but ATM there is a big incentive to get all the automation and get it working for you.
"Alexa, order some more laundry soap." I mean, honestly. We need cutting edge technology for this? I'd be a lot more interested in "Bitch, make me a sammich!"
I'm holding off any purchasing decision until the conversation is "oh yeah Alexa... keep doing that... yeah, swallow it all...". And I'd never call her "bitch", I respect her too much for that.
I own a 2021 Alfa Romeo and it appears to be offline.
Friend of mine used to drive Alfa's, right until the time he heard the announcement "would the owner of XXXX please identify yourself to staff, your car is on fire". It was parked outside at the time and had been for several hours, switched off, everything cooled down.
There's no cell phone coverage where I keep my car. If I don't come in to town within 45 days, what then?
We see you are driving with Firmware 4.02c, Friend Citizen, but this is a Firmware 4.03 Highway. Please report to your nearest termination center immediately. Thank you for your co-operation.
There are some left. And those are special enough that AI cannot do the job.
That is also what I hear from people that have tried it. For example, funding applications for research: 10% hard content, 90% crap. The 90% can be supplied by AI because they are never read anyways, just checked that they are there. And LLMs can do "better crap" nicely. But for the 10%, no chance to have an LLM do it successfully at all.
Many humans are good at hubris. The dumber and the less skill to fact-check, the more hubris.
Simple: All of those that can reasonably be automatized, have been so already, because AI is neither needed nor a good idea. The ones left are the ones where automating it does not work for some reason. This can be because they are special, or need a lot of maintenance or AI hallucinating even once would be a major disaster and conventional automation does not cut it.
There is no royal road to geometry. -- Euclid