When a lawyer "attests" to a court filing, the lawyer confirms its authenticity, truthfulness, and legal basis. By signing the document, a lawyer makes a representation to the court that they have conducted a reasonable inquiry and have not submitted the filing for an improper purpose.
"(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law;"

It's called Rule 11
https://www.law.cornell.edu/ru...

He signed a sworn statement along with the filing that states he stands behind his filing.
If a lawyer falsely signs filings, I'd support 1 warning with a fine much larger than 10k. Second time - disbarred.
We put a huge amount of trust in lawyers. If they abuse that trust, they gotta go.

Are they going allow MS to pull in all these documents without signing ironclad NDAs?

And Microsoft is going spend all this money to store all these documents without charging more? Or do these documents have some non-obvious value?

If I have access to every document at every company... Hmmmm.

How long before MS notices that the most common user input is: "That isn't what I want you stupid f***ing piece of mindless sh**t." My guess is never b/c they really don't care.

And how will it respond? Will it be: "To pay your Microsoft bill say Yes." "To add Microsoft services say Yes." When you really want to get Excel to add up and then slice and dice costs across 20,000 invoices.

I ran a dedupe on my drive and eliminated 8 redundant copies of the goatse guy.

#SaveWaterWithGoatse

The problem is youtube/google is claiming they practice moderation but they don't. Even after content is reported for being illegal like in this case it gets to stay. Instead google is using moderation as an excuse for practicing editorializing instead which wasn't the intent of 230.

I'm curious what you think "unaffiliated" means, since whatever nefarious party is stealing Steve's likeness is definitely posting content on youtube.

The AP article added the context of the joke, which didn't make it funny but subjectively I would agree that it was non-serious. One does not passively say "kill all x" after accused of being one of x in a group chat with friends because she is serious.

A manual review and some minor counseling would have solved this problem, but apparently nobody in a position of leadership understood the point of this software.

They likely poisoned the courts against them with so many fraudulent takedowns and filings. The same people behind those organizations are probably just reorganized around some other fictional entity.

Better yet throw them in jail without an opportunity to speak to their lawyer or friends/family. It's too optimistic to think that these cockroaches will be removed from positions of authority, but we can at least give them a dose of their own medicine so they can see how harmful it is.

Just as likely that she was the one being bullied. IDK why you would assume that an incompetent software package being implemented wrongly by a public district would have been correct. This claim that it was all done automatically without any human intervention is also just wrong. There's no way to perform an arrest without the officers involved making a determination of probable cause.

"Hurr durr, computer said you're guilty" isn't a defense.

You don't have to build a new school every time there's a shooting, that's just done to protect the guilty.

Everything we buy is more expensive to fund the fees that feed these very profitable loyalty programs. Even if you don't participate, it is baked into the credit card fees which are in turn baked into the price at the store.

Simplifying. You over pay by 2% to get 1% back. This is dumb.

I have to wonder. Did "Gemini Deep Think" solve the problems or simply regurgitate the answer from the billions of sucked up webpages, math research papers, etc. used to train the model? Actual competitors don't have the complete history of https://math.stackexchange.com... at their fingertips.

So the AI will figure out that I lost my job due to AI. Then the AI will offer me a lower price for a bad seat in the very back b/c it knows I can't afford anything more?

Learning to program isn't the same as Computer Science.

Computer Science is lots of algorithms, computational theory (finite automata, P and NP, etc.), graph theory, tons of numerical algorithms, lexical, syntax and semantic analysis, program transformations (loop unrolling, etc.), lots of compiler theory, databases, networking, cryptography, etc. Tons of really interesting stuff! A lot of CS is more like mathematics than programming. Lots of proofs.

Focusing on programming is a little like telling an engineering student that the curriculum is mostly bricklaying. Are we talking about a college that teaches computer science or a trade school doing "programming"?