

Shawshank reference?
Decentralise everything!
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.
Weird that they said “only” half an hour. Thats a really long time
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:
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.
I am definitely interested.
Except for 0, 1, 2, 3.
Integers are necessarily irrational because π is transcendental and not an algebraic number.
Just thinking out loud here.
I disagree with being able to opt out of being quoted, but I agree that one should be able to opt out of having their account visible in the the Quote Post. Or maybe I am misunderstanding what a Quote Post is supposed to be? I am thinking of it as a way to share someone else’s post, but also verifying the the quote wasnt just made up.
I would think, in the US, antitrust laws would apply.
Is this different from Intel and x86 architecture? (Genuinely asking)
Not a lawyer.
From the argument, it seems that the violation of the conditions in itself is not trespassing. Trespassing is staying after the conditions were violated. Since the person was promptly removed, it is very hard to argue that they trespassed.
This is either an amazing joke, or a really stupid statement.
Elon Musk, not Trump.
Sort of clickbait. Not the most egregious example.
But yes reading that line did make me feel misled.
Sure, but the Landlord’s Game was a critique of capitalism. The $200 was supposed to be wages even in her version.
I agree that that’s useful information. I wonder though, if it is that useful, if Lemmy or the Lemmy app does that automatically?
I suspect that mental health and social support at home play huge roles here.
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.