Good, I hate misunderstandings. Good things can come from disagreements, misunderstandings only produce frustration.

That said, Win 11 24h2 (and Win10 ESU) currently gets the same security updates as 25h2. Much like how linux backports new fixes into old releases. So, new fixes without new features is common.

I see your point, but I don't think it quite works unless one knows it is inaccurate. Otherwise, it's just being wrong. That is, there is a subset of cases for which your statement would be correct, "I don't know the answer, so I'll guess and not tell you I'm just guessing", but you've worded it so broadly that it would also include sincere errors.

One example of a non-lie your statement would have included would have been how, for over a thousand years, people believed flies had 4 legs because Aristotle didn't believe they could actually have 6 (maybe he thought they were arms, I don't know). So, had you asked say, Charlamagne, "how many legs does a fly have?", he may have said, without lying, 4.

So, I read all the definitions and find I must disagree. Even when the intent to deceive or mislead is not explicit in the definition, it is in the example.

i.e. - "an untrue or inaccurate statement that may or may not be believed true by the speaker or writer"
"the lies we tell ourselves to feel better" - explicit intent.

A lie is an intentional deception. Being wrong is... being wrong.

The EU has neither the will nor the ability to project power. Russia has the will but no longer has the power. They're burning themselves out in Ukraine. China has the will and is close to having the power. So, China is the only viable alternative, and they are evil.

In the end, it's a no-brainer. As I expect the responses to demonstrate.

Are you calling me a peasant to make me feel small or make yourself feel strong? What is your goal and did you advance it?

And are you familiar with the stated goals and preferred means of the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran? Are you aware of what their stated interests are? Have you fallen into the trap of Moral/Cultural relativism?

I realize that I have responded only with questions, but they are intended to give you the opportunity to justify your attitude.

Don't assume, I haven't given you my own opinion.

No, and I don't think we're on the same page. I'm not a dev, I work for an MSP and have to manage OS patching. I have controls for when critical, security, feature and optional updates get installed. How can I do that if literally nobody releases patches that way? Well, literally at least one company does. Microsoft categorizes their security patches, so I can have critical ones install now and defer less severe patches. Then, I have separate controls for Critical Updates, Update Rollups, Service Packs, Feature Packs, Definition Packs, Drivers, and Other.

If a security patch is included in a feature pack, there will be a separate security update for prior versions.

Do you really think they're going to learn that much more from browser extensions? Beyond, "bad at using browsers", or, "will do whatever a popup says"?

Besides, this is largely in the context of fingerprinting, and you don't need those to track users who log in.

What are you arguing? Even with what I assume was unintentional repetition, I don't know what you're trying to say.

What I said is simple - if part of a group grows and another shrinks, you can't say it shrunk overall. You don't know if it grew or shrank with just that information.

Should I have left out the examples? Is that where the confusion arose?

Well, it's a good thing that's not what's happening here. If you think that what matters about a person is their race or their sex, you're a racist or a sexist. A simple factual statement that requires no context or hypotheticals.

That had me thrown for a minute, but in a pleasantly amusing way. Especially since I originally turned it into "the rapist" and couldn't figure out who was raping the sexists.

What about the existing opinion pollution and fact distortion? Will AI be more or less biased? Will it be more or less accurate? I don't know.

I am confident that it will be more likely to use correct grammar.

Wait, no, that isn't correct. If the number of people in the upper middle increases by 1 million, and the number of people in the lower- and mid- decrease by 1 million, then the size of the middle class did not change at all. If the upper increased by 1 million and the rest decreased by 500k, then the middle class grew.

You cannot assume a change in the size of the pie because the size of the slices changed.

Yeah, they should probably have presented it as a range so that they could capture rural areas, where $133k is quite a lot, and expensive cities where upper-middle might be $3-400k.