Just seeing this now. I didn’t downvote you, bud. My instance has downvotes disabled. Get outta your reddit mindset, I was trying to drive conversation!
I was driving at “well, you watched it? Why? And why would they anything differently if folks like you and I keep watching them?”
But all good, I’ll tag your username so I don’t reply to your posts in the future and you don’t have to be concerned about my non-existent downvotes that don’t mean anything on Lemmy anyway.
And I’m saying that in many states your lack of consent doesn’t matter (legally speaking). Your consent is not required if someone else decides to record with their device.
I don’t like it. Just stating that you declining to consent does nothing if someone else records you and gives the recordings to the police. That’s not a search of you or your possessions, that’s a search of someone else’s recording that did not require your consent to be made.
None of this is new, just increasingly insidious and ubiquitous.
Why do they keep making them? People watch them. Rebirth has passed $800m at the box office.
Why do people watch them? IDK, dinosaurs are cool? I agree it was a bad, unoriginal film. I still watched it and apparently you did too. I knew it would be bad and watched it anyway because I know I like a cheesy, “bad” film on occasion. Why did you watch it?
And it was supposed to be a “soft reboot” of the franchise, so viewers can forget about the one about grasshoppers instead of dinosaurs. So maybe that was supposed to be the “Rebirth” of it all.
Your consent doesn’t matter (legally) in a single-party consent state. Which includes some bigs like New York and Texas. California is a two-party consent state though, so theoretically these people should be informing each other that they are using recording equipment.
It’s gender-affirming care. So it should be widely available under the guidance of knowledgeable medical professionals.
I also wish that those who would limit the gender-affirming care of others would be the first impacted by their own bigotry.
“May you have the day you voted for.”
No. They’re just providing statistically probable answers based on the information in their training models.
Ask, “what size bolt do I need for the spinner in a 2012 Maytag dishwasher model ABC123?”. It probably has the dishwasher manual in its training model, maybe even content from Maytag customer forums where multiple people asked this exact question, and so has a high probability of generating a correct answer. Ask it something more controversial or unique, where answers on similar questions are varied or rare, it will be less likely to generate an accurate answer because it has less data to pull from.
They also “hallucinate”, or generate answers that are entirely false and not directly written anywhere else. Like there have been a number of lawyers caught using an LLM to write their legal briefs, because the LLM reference sources that don’t actually exist; it just made up Adam v Bob type case names.
I disagree that you can’t share a song with the whole world due to language. I listen to stuff in languages I don’t speak frequently. And making music out of one’s voice seems pretty darn human.
There is a time and place for instrumental for me. I like listening to it when I need to focus, as opposed to songs that sometimes distract me more.
Replying with a competing point because arguments are even more engaging! You silly goose, Luddite, woke boomer. Get a life and watch some Fox News and/or CNN.
They have stolen more PhD level work to dump into the training model?
Can we please give good roles to women and people of color?
Agreed. Yes, please. Though Michael Crichton material is low on the list of places that will happen. Mr. “What are you talking about about my women characters aren’t multi-dimensional? I never mentioned that secretary characters chest size so of course she will sound flat”.
For a really fun rabbit hole, follow author Eliezer Yudkowsky to LessWrong, his community blog/forum/rationalist community, to the Zizians with their attempted seasteading and string of murders.
Eminently forgettable. I saw it earlier this week and am already struggling to recall details. It felt like a Netflix flick.
Mostly I was left wondering why the pilot in Dominion who felt like such an obvious future for the franchise, has been dropped and forgotten.
In my head canon, Michael Crichton made one more JP script before he died, realized women could be just as meaningful and competent characters as men, and wrote a script around the pilot. Wise absolutely had action film lead energy.
I’ve been working on deconstructing my childhood, being raised as a young earth creationist. I long since dropped theism, but am still trying to clean up some of the side effects. The talk.origins newsgroup has been invaluable. So many of the things I was taught, I didn’t even know were specifically creationist BS because they were all I heard from the time I was a baby.
I’m always down for recommendations on “adults should know this basic science 101”.
I typically wake up dehydrated AF. So I wake up, drink the glass of water I set out next to me the night before, and wait to not feel like I have a whole ecosystem growing in my mouth. It’s 5-10 min for me, then it’s up, toilet, restart work laptop, make coffee, greet my Person, and finally login to work laptop for the work day. 8 second commute to my work desk is choice.
There’s a ringtone from the Jason Statham movie Crank where he hears a ring and it starts distorting because he’s high AF. That’s my ringtone. I like the frequency sweep and discordance; it makes it easier to pick out of background noise for me.
Normal effect of burnout.
Retake because of the grade you expect to receive? Or retake to absorb the concepts better on a second go around?
If the latter, I recommend studying independently instead. There are so many online resources now that are better for learning than the traditional college lecture model.
Very much dependent on the crime. If it crosses puritanical, compulsive heteronormative shit, they’d call for corporal punishment. If it’s something they’ve ever done, it’s NBD. Their moral framework is “whatever my bigoted pastor and Trump tell me”.
No specific rules on content, although I’m sure a game would have been retroactively banned if our mom saw something gory. The rules were on time spent playing. 30 min per kid per school day, only after schoolwork and chores were done. 60 min per kid on weekend days, again after chores were done.
Minesweeper was not considered a game, for some reason. So we were all hella fast at minesweeper on the highest difficulty.
I think of the “bad” dates I would want to be able to warn other women of that didn’t rise to the level of calling the cops. The guy who ordered triple the food and drinks I did and skipped out on the bill. The guy who flat out lied about multiple things and then got irate when I politely excused myself from the date. The MAGA weirdo who went on an unhinged rant about how I needed to submit to him because God said so. I imagine some men have comparable experiences with some anti-social women. The experiences coming to mind were not illegal, but were absolutely things I want to spare my fellow humans from.
I would prefer the dating apps themselves have some mechanism for disincentivizing anti-social behaviors. It would have to be more than a simple 5-star rating.
I wonder how it would work IRL to offer the ability to write a few sentences in response to prompts about a date. The written review is not published as-is, but is used in grouping of many reviews to give a summary about a person. Like the summary product reviews on Amazon now. “Bill’s dates found he was prompt and polite. Some dates expressed discomfort at some of his political views” and “Bob’s dates warn he is often late and is quick to use foul language to describe women. Multiple dates report no intention to communicate with Bob further”. “Ben’s dates report he has skipped out on the bill repeatedly, and sends unsolicited dick pics. Multiple dates have blocked him”.
The group summary gives a buffer so the person reviewed doesn’t know which specific date said what. And ensures the summary doesn’t include negative comments about a person unless multiple dates of theirs independently report similar experiences.
Of course a bad actor could ditch their dating profile and start fresh any time they build up enough negative reviews to make their summary look bad. And of course the reviews and the summaries would have to be secured tighter than “Tea” is.
Nah, I care more about AI being used to fuckup our economic situation worse; putting money in the owner class’s pockets, putting more of the working class out of jobs, and further stripping away what minimal social safety nets we have for the folks out of a job.
Also concerned about all the shit that will be pushed through while AI is used as a distraction. Like all the surveillance crap that never would have been accepted 30 years ago but now … Oh, look, shiny new AI!