Mohamed

Except that he has no executive power over those people.

Yes, it is legal. There are many christians in Saudi Arabia, for example. What is usually illegal is public religious practices of religions other than Islam.

It works very well for me. My evidence that it is private is that I download plenty (more than 1 TB per month) and I never get a copyright notice from my ISP. When I torrent non-privately I get plenty of copyright notices, sometimes several times for the same torrent.

It does have, however, some major performance issues. It can be very slow, and it can use up a lot of RAM and a lot of CPU. Its internal database, which saves state of downloads, frequently gets corrupted at which point it has to be re-generated, meaning the list of torrents (not the downloads) is lost. It can be quite a bit slower than other torrent downloaders, and sometimes torrents stall for a while as it waits to prepare the network, especially at start-up.

It’s been getting a lot better though with every update, which is quite frequent.

That’s it exactly. JBP, JD Vance, etc., play word games of rhetoric to get what they want. It’s like they are defence lawyers and morality is a legal system they are trying to game - they argue whatever just to win.

Yeah they do that. It is really sneaky to call illegal immigrants criminals because of their illegal immigration. It’s like someone being called a criminal just for resisting arrest.

What do you dislike about the AI act?

Interesting idea to run a low-bandwidth link. It would keep us connected, but posts from disconnected instances would arrive late, depending on how much the traffic (posts between disconnected instances) exceeds available bandwidth.

It’s interesting to explore this more. We could, for example, prioritize specific types of posts, users, or instances to make those faster.

Not gravy. Op was talkng about gravy tea.

Yes, billionaires could end poverty. But they never did and never will.

There is a Bloomberg opinion piece (https://archive.ph/JKT85) that stated argues that China is so-called trade wars proof. TLDR: almost no day-to-day goods are imported from the US. The imports from the US are mainly things like cars, phones, etc. That is, tariffs will have a very small effect on the lower and middle classes in China. Compare this to the situation in the US: China is the main source for cheap items at Walmart, Amazon, etc. Tariffs can absolutely devestate the lower classes in the US.

So, it seems that China can easily win the attrition war against the US.

Keep in mind that tapes are still the most efficient storage medium, in terms of both cost and physical space used. What they lack is speed. These characteristics make them the perfect medium for archiving and backup.

To add: there’s no way money can be saved by switching to another medium. Switching to HDDs, SSDs, etc will be many times more expensive, and switching to cloud would be much more expensive over the long run. It’s unclear whether he wants to move existing data to other mediums (very expensive and stupid - the tapes are already there and have almost no upkeep) or just new data (slightly less stupid).

I agree, but what is the alternative? I mean, is there a neutral way to get new supreme court justices?

(Honestly askibg)

I love the line “Mullin … criticized The Oklahoman for covering the story.”

Context?

I hate myself for laughing at that

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.

So, soo close to supporting vaccines.