So, what words are allowed? Are there any agricultural terms left for the agriculture department to use?

Generated AI CP should be illegalized even if its creation did not technically harm anyone. The reason is, presumably it looks too close to real CP, so close that it: 1) normalizes consumption of CP, 2) grows a market for CP, and 3) Real CP could get off the hook by claiming it is AI.

While there are similar reasons to be against clearly not real CP (e.g. hentai), this type at least does not have problem #3. For example, there doesnt need to be an investigation into whether a picture is real or not.

Shawshank reference?

Most people use “religion” to mean “organized religion” in particular, and many people further take it to mean christianity and christianity-like religions. Religion is a word that is hard to define, but I think that although there are many edge cases, most people mostly agree on what is and what isnt a religion. My point here is that, just because they are not definable in a strict sense, does not mean the words “religion” and “faith” are “pointless”. They very much have meaning.

Many words are like that: no clear definition but they refer to real things or ideas. For example, existentialism, postmodernism, artistic styles (such as cubism or impressionism), etc. And even many terms in the sciences are like that. None of the words mathematics, physics or philosophy have clear-cut definitions. Hell, i can take this to the extreme. Even words like water or gold do not have a clear definition, in the way that lay people use them. Seawater is water even though it is made up of more than just H2O. 95% ethanol is never called water, even though 5% of it is water.

Thats the thing. Rounding up people from the street will not catch any criminals (legally speaking), by definition: if they committed a crime, and a judge deemed them guilty, they would be in jail or they would be fugitives. In either case, they are not unknowns, and authorities must’ve already knew about them. Getting people randomly off the street, you cannot, legally speaking, be catching criminals.

Even if it didn’t go to bluesky.app first before the actual link, clicks on it can still be made to be tracked. It’s trivial to do it much more discreetly.

It is definitely tracked, but I would guess that turning it into a bluesky link has other uses, not all nefarious, such as: link previews, caching, dealing with dead links.

Not sure where I stand on this issue, but I am leaning towards that it shouldn’t have been removed for being “offensive”.

Anyway, on a slightly related topic, hijab is a pretty complex issue. It is both a symbol of religious freedom, and of religious oppression. In many parts of the world, women are forced to wear it, and in some other parts of the world, women are forbidden from wearing it. Even in places that have more freedom wrt this issue, women might be forced by their families to wear it.

Yes and no, in my opinion. Attackers can keep a list of all compromised passwords, and try it even for accoints that may not be associated. This is a much smaller search space than to go through every possible password of length <= 32 (for example).

EDIT: I was wrong. The minimum seems to have been 7 or 8.

Why are the exactly ten, the minimum number required to advance the vote?

In the same vein, Musk didn’t make billions. Tesla workers did.

Scotland, UK, which is not in the EU.

Next up, Reddit punishes users who downvote peaceful posts.

So, soo close to supporting vaccines.

Exactly. They aren’t even attempting to scare Tesla customers themselves. It’s all about tarnishing Musk’s image, sending a message, and damaging his cashcow.

I wonder if, in his infinite costcutting wisdom, he removed “redundancies” in the twitter stack that wouldve helped it better withstand cyberattacks.

Weird that they said “only” half an hour. Thats a really long time

Just replaced every instance of the word “war” with “deal”

The connection also looks like a RAM stick’s. I think.

While too far left could mean this, the op just said “slightly left”. Of course, if what you meant is that Bernie Sanders is barely left enough, that anyone to the right of him is the problem, then nvm.

This is irrelevant because Meta should not be tried for this the same as a private individual would be.

The case for torrenting being illegal for private individuals is one or both of:

1. Downloading in of itself is stealing.
2. Uploading is giving unauthorized access to someone else who otherwise might have had a harder time finding it. Anything else, such as watching, reading, listening, learning, etc. is not illegal (or does not make sense to make illegal). The exception might be publishing. This is rare for private individuals (e.g. using pirated FL studio to make a commercial song).

For corporations, a lot change. Firstly, a corporation downloading a torrent is necessarily making unauthorized material available for some people of the company. It’s like a group of 20 friends all downloaded and uploaded to each other. Secondly, they used this copyrighted material commercially (like playing pirated music in a public night club). Both should be illegal.

However, all of this is still a distraction. The real issue is using copyrighted materials to train commercial AI. Does Meta require permission from copyright holders to make AI based on their work? The law is grey on this, and desperately needs regulations.

Just my thoughts.