If you take away the mustache, he actually looks exactly like most of the women he’s criticizing

No joke, I once spent an entire day feeling like I was straight up gonna die. I thought I had appendicitis or something but the pain was nowhere near my appendix. Either way it kept me laying prone waiting for death for like 8-12 hours before I finally went to the hospital.

So I go the hospital, they run all these tests, Im pretty sure they gave me some kind of drugs in the IV without fully telling me because I remember feeling a lot better and having to try hard not to giggle when they wheeled me around to get scanned.

So they do all this stuff, and then finally the doctor comes in and tells me Im just full of shit. Like, literally, I was massively constipated and that was the entire issue.

I got back home and was in a ton of pain again, so I drank an entire bottle of Miralax and then pooped my entire soul and most of my organs out the next morning. Im talkin ass-chaffing farts

As someone who was a TA a bit, I think that is 99% because if schools tried to hold students accountable to the standards of even ten years ago they would have to fail 2/3rds of their students.

Highschool becoming a joke means none of the kids have strong enough core skills to be tackling real college work by the time they get there, but schools cant afford to enforce actual quality standards for work. The graded model has completely fallen apart at this point given how steep the curve is. The quality of work that gets an A today would have been a B or high C from 10-15 years ago. Of course there is real A grade work being done too, but what defines an A grade has ballooned to a ridiculous degree such that most of it is not really A grade work

The problem isnt new, it was already bad 10 years ago to be honest. I had a professor in community college about 10 years ago who had been a professor at ASU, and she had quit teaching there specifically because the university wouldnt allow anyone to be graded below a C, regardless of if they did any work or not.

Most large public universities are just degree mills at this point, or bordering on it if not

Generally speaking once you are past the second year of undergrad you have no choice but to finish out without taking a loss. Virtually all US colleges and universities require you to spend two years with them in order to graduate there, so they will only grant you transfer credits for the first two years worth of coursework (even if you are one class away from graduating at your current school). Plus, higher level courses are less likely to have exact course matches than intro courses across the board, although that is more of an issue in the humanities than in the sciences

The word hallucination has zero implication of intent whatsoever. Last time I checked hallucination is an entirely involuntary experience, regardless of the context the word is used in.

They are called hallucination in computer science not “to romanticize” it. It is called that because the output is totally random from the perspective of the input. If there is no logical path from input to the output, it is similar to a human hallucinating. Human sees no actual weird visual stimuli that results in them hallucinating a dragon, therefore the input info from their eyes has no bearing on what they imagine is actually there.

This is different from “fabrication” in that the AI intentionally creating fake info based on your input request would not be a hallucination, because there would be a relationship between input and output.

While you say you prefer “fabrication”, the word fabrication actually implies some intent that is absent from what we are referring to as AI hallucinations

Its not really more futuristic, considering its a tried and true design.

I think you mean its just better designed

The purpose of my comment was kind of to call out the ridiculousness of the question being on the form, because if that broad definition is how were defining war criminals, then yes I think logically it would mean people funding the war crimes in any capacity would then be war criminals themselves. Again, by the definition assumed based on the question being on the questionnaire. When I read it my first thought was that I could probably not say no to that question as a US taxpayer

Personally I dont think aiding & abetting in any way, especially through involuntary taxation, is enough to define someone as a war criminal. But its fair to say we (collectively) arent doing enough to stop the bad shit our taxes are funding, which is true of any Israeli citizen right now as well.

People could refuse to pay their taxes and risk arrest, but I dont think thats an effective form of protest. Better to not be in prison and have a voice. But there would be a logical consistency in doing it

How could any Israeli citizen say no on #3 At this point. Even if you arent directly committing atrocities yourself you still are funding the government engaging in it. Not to mention most all of them have served in one capacity or another (involuntary aspects nonwithstanding)

Plenty of countries have some degree of immigration issues whenever there are worse off countries near by, which is true for most countries.

For example, the president of the Dominican Republic is doing the same thing right now to deport Haitians back to their half of the island.

Its insane how many mini Trumps there are

deleted by creator

That is basically the point I was trying to make. I used to do all kinds of stupid stuff 10 years ago, and I would never touch anything today. Of anyone left who would try anything, so many of them have died that how many are left?

I think even most people drawn towards substance abuse for one reason or another would be put off by the lethality of modern street drugs, especially when there are other options. Alcohol, cannabis, whatever

Or literally just that many people have died at this point from fentanyl that we are running out of people to have OD

Save this example for the next time some chud tries to tell you colonization is a past event and not an ongoing process right this minute

St Louisans voted to legalize weed before most states in country ever did. DC I think was the only city that legalized it first. Then the state government overturned what people voted for.

St Louis also voted for a minimum $15 wage way before $15 was the crap wage it is now. The state government then overturned that too.

The MO state government has been tyrannical ever since the state turned from purple to red. Imagine where St. Louisans would be today if we had gotten a $15/hr min wage 10 years ago…

I love my city, and MO at large is a beautiful state if you can ignore the political bullshit, but I cant and its among the plethora of reasons why I live in CO now instead. It may be far from perfect too, but at least they recognize home rule as being more important than state government tyranny

Put some respect on A1’s name

No signs of trouble in the henhouse, reports fox

I have $800M worth of lint in my belly button, apparently

Itd be pretty amazing if the Episcopal church turned all of its infrastructure for resettling migrants into infrastructure for sheltering at-risk migrants in the US and protecting them from ICE. Im just sayin’

All cities that rely on a tourism based economy should be paying at least one person, if not a team, just to focus enforcement on this particular issue.

All illegal STRs either would be paying proper taxes as STRs, or wouldn’t be STRs and instead would be long term housing, if these laws were enforced.

All tourist cities struggle with the same issue of lacking workforce housing, which means there are no real locals, which means there really is no real vitality to the area at the end of the day. Necessary services that a city needs to survive rely on a workforce that lives an hour drive away.

Taxes on STRs are often directed towards solving housing issues, which is generally helpful. Overall though, the dominance of STRs is the death knell for any desirable tourist town. The conversion of what would otherwise be normal housing into a STR might make business sense. For example many STRs in my town charge more per night than they would probably garner a month in long term rent. But its something that should be allowed only in extremely limited use cases, like people being allowed to STR their own primary residence only. I think what we are learning from STRs is that there is a finite limit on how much living space in a city can be for tourist use before the city itself can no longer function.

Unfettered it just destroys rental markets by removing otherwise available stock. The only way it ever generates more money is by squeezing stock out of the LTR market, pumping the value of land/rent in the general sense, driving up the value of what they can charge per night while real people are out in the street because there are no places cheap enough (or in existence) to rent for a month.

Towns have to stop acting like they are the CEOs whose sole job is to raise land valuations for their shareholders. If pretty much any town or city in the country had only focused on what produced higher land value since their founding, then they probably wouldnt still be around now. In fact, many of the worst decisions made in the history of American urban design were made chasing the rabbit of higher land values.

Paying people to enforce STR laws isnt just a good way to collect tax revenue, but literally a way to protect the remaining stock in the rental market. Hopefully it only becomes more important and we see a crackdown on STRs in general

It has brain health implications when ingested at levels way above the standard levels used in virtually all water systems in the United States. Stop spreading bullshit. The only evidence of negative health effects from fluoride is based on studies where people were exposed to over 2x the levels of fluoride in municipal water