aldhissla

Good God, Lemon!

Yea, on a second read, I could’ve picked a better word there 😆

A friend. Bad enough. Don’t have any of the others (anymore).

That’s true, I was there, saw the whole thing ☝️

The Heimlich. I’d never thought I’d ever use it. But just a few weeks ago, we got some dürüms (kebab in a flatbread wrap) and at one point I hear her going strangely silent and wheezing. I lifted her up and gave her the maneuver. She spat out a large thing of unchewed salad, for which I chewed her out for a bit.

Ffs, can’t imagine if she’d died in my living room…

What others failed to mention: Flock cameras are full of gold, silver, and RAM. They’re like free lootboxes scattered all over.

First time I saw someone with that line-in-circle-in-triangle tattoo, I straight up asked if she was a conspiracy theorist. By now, I’d be happy to hear a “yes”… 🙄

I think you’re confusing the real threat of cyber (I hate this choice of words) warfare with the conjured-up random threats to whatever (music industry, children) to pass surveillance legislation.

The former would require changes in and investments into a country’s ability to protect its vital infrastructure, the latter lets governments pass anti-populace legislation to further corporate profits and control. It’s not the same, it’s not even about regular civilian criminals, but state-sponsored actors.

Because everything else is enshittifying at an increasing rate. News at 10.

Nah, seriously, I remember a time when Macs were considered ultra-reliable (“it just works”), and now when I look at those of my team developing on Macs… jfc it’s a Soulslike level of hell.

30 Rock. The classic.

Of course you would. But I also don’t quite believe you. Everybody lies on the internet, and when I see corporate PR being regurgitated by someone pretending to be “just one of us”, indignant when confronted, expecting the benefit of the doubt, I call it out.

Well just the other day I was doing my regular human activities with my biological friend Frobert, and just between consuming two Earth crustaceans, we came to talk about the benefits of alchemy to transmute people into gold. We’ve got the idea from Grok.

It doesn’t matter to me whether you’re an actual shill or someone genuinely uninformed whose talking points reflect whatever a shill would say. If you give me the Musk fan impression, I’m gonna give you the Musk fan treatment. Call me patronising if you want 🤷.

Because “planning to” in this case is practically code for “grifting their investors with fairytales”, especially with these people. The self-driving car, the underground tunnel that would replace motorways, the chatbot that would replace people, the Mars colony, these are all lies no matter if it’s Musk saying them or anyone else trying to get some of the same easy money.

Nah, man. I have an issue with your wording. You have not been “hearing a lot of talk”. You are quoting one specific lie of a prolific grifter.

Nobody in their right mind agrees with this. If you had put your question as “Elon Musk, owner of a satellite launching company, as well as several money burning pits, wants others to pay him to put some of those money burners into orbit. Is there any sense to this?”, the answer would be trivial.

Fuck your censorship, cunt.

Simple as.

Running that LLM on an organic potato, I see…

Nothing above Turing-completeness (if even that) is strictly necessary. But as OP had pointed out in other comments, pronouns have a practical use.

Nah, it’s just a single differentiation between people and non-persons, e.g. him vs that.

There are gender-free languages that still make this distinction, e.g. Hungarian ő vs az.

To add to the subject of complexity, in English you have 3 genders, 2 numbers (singular/plural), and 4 cases, totalling a maximum of 24 pronouns. A gender-free language would just set the first factor to 1. Adding differentiation by e.g. status would increment (in cases of there being one extra formal gender for the 3rd person) or multiply it (when there are different versions for all pronouns).

This question has a false premise and thus makes no sense.

Many natural languages are already genderless, so your question is equivalent to: “In genderless and sexless languages, what are pronouns based on?”, implying that there has to be some sort of gender-based polymorphism among pronouns.

I’m not.

No. Ghosts are bound by contract to the screening shooting location, not the props.