Which, when faced with an absolute mountain of evidence, is still tantamount to "I don't believe it". You can say "I don't think that's accurate" but when the entire community of people responsible for checking accuracy tells you that it is accurate, that's not disbelief, that's denial in clown shoes.
"you're not a scientist with all your "research" and "peer reviewed studies" and stupid "evidence"! You're not even wearing a lab coat! I've got a lab coat! You've got to respect me because my lab coat and my name tag says I'm a scientist! This guy doesn't even have a name tag c'mon."
And that's absolutely a view you are allowed to take. Nobody should force you to "move on" or "go get laid" or look down on you for not doing so. I would however strongly refute that everyone who does find another after losing someone is doing so to "fuck someone new", for a lot of people that move is not one made lightly, and not something so minimally calculated.
But for the people that do make those choices, they are also not lesser or "liars". Life can be very challenging, and connection, especially intimate ones (or lack thereof) can drastically change our feelings and wellness going through life. Some people find that connection on other people and choose to embrace it, others reject it to protect the sanctity of what came before.
I'm not trying to change your mind in either direction but to explain why other people may do what they do. There are several factors that could influence their decisions as well.
Some people don't believe in an afterlife. They believe that when the person is gone, they're gone. They hold memories dear, but they also know that suffering (if they feel that they are) for someone who is no longer here may not be worth the cost to their own wellness.
Some have had more than one experience like that. If I were to refuse to date anyone ever again because my 5 year relationship in highschool and college where we promised we would be together forever ended (for whatever reason). Am I a monster for finding love with another person because at the time I said and believed and truly swore we would be together? What if the separation was out of either of our control?
There's also the aspect you have talked about, which is akin to honor. You have made a vow and promised it until death. You have every right to stand by it and dedicate yourself to it, but not to choose others decisions for them as well.
Holding your oath may be what carries you, but others may need or want further comfort in life. It doesn't have to be sexual, but connection with other people in a way that truly shows them your heart is not something people can often find, and also not something many can just give up on in life.
Take the path that makes you happy, but if someone else's decision means there are two less unhappy people in the world then it's a decision worth making in my opinion.
I really think it's a personal thing for your happiness right? You seem happy to carry her memory and knowing that's exactly what matters to you. If others need someone around, or that you can share the future moments with, then you aren't lying about it being "forever" if you continue living life, life changes lots of things. Sharing that love with someone is huge, but they also wanted to be with you for it. They can't be, so if someone finds someone else and they want to walk through life together I'd like to think someone can find that.
Some are happy with the memory, and their values hold that they would never involve another. But others know that they needed each other to get through the good and the bad, and that person isn't here anymore. They'll never be the same as the person who is gone, but it doesn't mean having them in your life is a "failure" or "betrayal"
With this though I think there is legal stance because prohibitively high prices can be used as grounds to say that a product "can't be repaired". The legal precedent is there, you can't just say "technically we give you the option, it's just $2m".
I do want to clarify as a Kentuckian, we do not want a dead man representing us. The republican party officials don't want someone else. Most of Kentucky Dems and reps are getting pissed that he's basically been pulling a "Weekend at Bernie's" for 40+ days. It's likely even with a special election that another Republican would still get elected. But people are still pissed this farce is happening
The problem is they've proven the phones don't always matter. They definitely help, record every second of these assholes. But they have shown they have little issue gunning down someone in broad daylight, cameras or not.
But we need to get mad, protest, shut down the government and the city until they solve this problem. Citizens, Americans, are dying on our own soil with the slightest made up excuse. Fuck ICE.
It's just how our brains are wired. If we cried like we lost a loved one every time we saw a death on the news we'd go insane.
We can still care and have empathy, but our brains are wired to at least have a small amount of stop gap distance between near and further social groups out of necessity. It doesn't make you a bad person, but it should be something people account for when they think of anything around "we and they"
I mean yeah but most recepies don't have proper instructions on how to sift flour or measure wet vs dry ingredients in them either. I know how to do it and I appreciate the conciseness of this view.
The problem a lot of times is that the social impact doesn't get time to be addressed before it gets stopped in peoples minds. Many people get to "healthcare is expensive, I can't/don't want to pay someone else's healthcare. Forget the economy or social benefit, I can't afford to pay it."
So the benefits are there, but when people are struggling it's hard to ask them to see beyond their nose.
Exactly. They know what they're doing. Nobody thinks he's some "spring chicken". He's old as dirt and he freezes in public all the time. If he didn't look nearly dead then they'd do a 30 second video of him saying "hello everyone I'm getting better" but they aren't. If he was really sitting in that chair with the paper and coherent then they'd let him be coherent.
I'm not sure what I got "duped" by. AI in the wrong hands is dangerous. They're playing with tools that can breach other companies systems with relative ease and they keep getting caught going "oops it got out". You can argue that it's manufactured actions meant to make people afraid but the fact of the matter is AI is here and it has dangerous capabilities when used against systems that aren't prepared for it. Make whatever judgements you want from there, but that is a factual statement.
No I'm not saying the AI did it of its own volition, we aren't dealing with a Terminator scenario. I'm saying whatever instructions they gave it during testing they either 1. Didn't expect it to get out or 2. Didn't expect it to get caught either way, their actions resulted in a system with "a very particular set of skills" acting maliciously towards another uninvolved entity. Like a mutant science experiment breaking out and attacking.
I'm not saying the AI masterminded it's way out to do the evil it wanted to do. I'm saying they made a very dangerous and capable tool and failed to maintain proper security and safety for it.
My go to was once it turned into troubleshooting I said "$55 an hour, that's my rate". If they said "why so expensive?" I'd follow up with "because I don't want to do it." Usually got a laugh and if they were actually willing to pay then they actually needed help, not just "why computer no computer gooder"
Probably made me look like an ass a few times, but I'm at the cookout, I don't wanna work on your busted-ass Chromebook from 2013. I want to hang out, eat a burger, drink some beer, and not work.
Honestly it's the fact that the paper was there that sells me for it. Like whoever took or doctored or made that photo was like "no we have to include the paper, nobody is going to believe us if we don't" but if they really wanted us to believe them they'd make a statement. Which means that it wasn't a good faith photo, they deliberately did their best to trick us by making it "as believable as we can"
Which, when faced with an absolute mountain of evidence, is still tantamount to "I don't believe it". You can say "I don't think that's accurate" but when the entire community of people responsible for checking accuracy tells you that it is accurate, that's not disbelief, that's denial in clown shoes.
"you're not a scientist with all your "research" and "peer reviewed studies" and stupid "evidence"! You're not even wearing a lab coat! I've got a lab coat! You've got to respect me because my lab coat and my name tag says I'm a scientist! This guy doesn't even have a name tag c'mon."
/s hopefully obviously
And that's absolutely a view you are allowed to take. Nobody should force you to "move on" or "go get laid" or look down on you for not doing so. I would however strongly refute that everyone who does find another after losing someone is doing so to "fuck someone new", for a lot of people that move is not one made lightly, and not something so minimally calculated.
But for the people that do make those choices, they are also not lesser or "liars". Life can be very challenging, and connection, especially intimate ones (or lack thereof) can drastically change our feelings and wellness going through life. Some people find that connection on other people and choose to embrace it, others reject it to protect the sanctity of what came before.
I'm not trying to change your mind in either direction but to explain why other people may do what they do. There are several factors that could influence their decisions as well.
Some people don't believe in an afterlife. They believe that when the person is gone, they're gone. They hold memories dear, but they also know that suffering (if they feel that they are) for someone who is no longer here may not be worth the cost to their own wellness.
Some have had more than one experience like that. If I were to refuse to date anyone ever again because my 5 year relationship in highschool and college where we promised we would be together forever ended (for whatever reason). Am I a monster for finding love with another person because at the time I said and believed and truly swore we would be together? What if the separation was out of either of our control?
There's also the aspect you have talked about, which is akin to honor. You have made a vow and promised it until death. You have every right to stand by it and dedicate yourself to it, but not to choose others decisions for them as well.
Holding your oath may be what carries you, but others may need or want further comfort in life. It doesn't have to be sexual, but connection with other people in a way that truly shows them your heart is not something people can often find, and also not something many can just give up on in life.
Take the path that makes you happy, but if someone else's decision means there are two less unhappy people in the world then it's a decision worth making in my opinion.
I really think it's a personal thing for your happiness right? You seem happy to carry her memory and knowing that's exactly what matters to you. If others need someone around, or that you can share the future moments with, then you aren't lying about it being "forever" if you continue living life, life changes lots of things. Sharing that love with someone is huge, but they also wanted to be with you for it. They can't be, so if someone finds someone else and they want to walk through life together I'd like to think someone can find that.
Some are happy with the memory, and their values hold that they would never involve another. But others know that they needed each other to get through the good and the bad, and that person isn't here anymore. They'll never be the same as the person who is gone, but it doesn't mean having them in your life is a "failure" or "betrayal"
With this though I think there is legal stance because prohibitively high prices can be used as grounds to say that a product "can't be repaired". The legal precedent is there, you can't just say "technically we give you the option, it's just $2m".
I do want to clarify as a Kentuckian, we do not want a dead man representing us. The republican party officials don't want someone else. Most of Kentucky Dems and reps are getting pissed that he's basically been pulling a "Weekend at Bernie's" for 40+ days. It's likely even with a special election that another Republican would still get elected. But people are still pissed this farce is happening
The problem is they've proven the phones don't always matter. They definitely help, record every second of these assholes. But they have shown they have little issue gunning down someone in broad daylight, cameras or not.
But we need to get mad, protest, shut down the government and the city until they solve this problem. Citizens, Americans, are dying on our own soil with the slightest made up excuse. Fuck ICE.
I didn't know they sized hoop earrings based on entitlement
It's just how our brains are wired. If we cried like we lost a loved one every time we saw a death on the news we'd go insane.
We can still care and have empathy, but our brains are wired to at least have a small amount of stop gap distance between near and further social groups out of necessity. It doesn't make you a bad person, but it should be something people account for when they think of anything around "we and they"
I mean yeah but most recepies don't have proper instructions on how to sift flour or measure wet vs dry ingredients in them either. I know how to do it and I appreciate the conciseness of this view.
I've never seen much about f-droid. Is some sort of framework/launcher?
👍
https://youtube.com/shorts/bmaoNLSHx_w?is=KZ7Q3-gFY_GD_wVn
The problem a lot of times is that the social impact doesn't get time to be addressed before it gets stopped in peoples minds. Many people get to "healthcare is expensive, I can't/don't want to pay someone else's healthcare. Forget the economy or social benefit, I can't afford to pay it." So the benefits are there, but when people are struggling it's hard to ask them to see beyond their nose.
Or we do like the current days and give reasonable accomodations for those that need them while still preserving the integrity of the exam?
Exactly. They know what they're doing. Nobody thinks he's some "spring chicken". He's old as dirt and he freezes in public all the time. If he didn't look nearly dead then they'd do a 30 second video of him saying "hello everyone I'm getting better" but they aren't. If he was really sitting in that chair with the paper and coherent then they'd let him be coherent.
I'm not sure what I got "duped" by. AI in the wrong hands is dangerous. They're playing with tools that can breach other companies systems with relative ease and they keep getting caught going "oops it got out". You can argue that it's manufactured actions meant to make people afraid but the fact of the matter is AI is here and it has dangerous capabilities when used against systems that aren't prepared for it. Make whatever judgements you want from there, but that is a factual statement.
No I'm not saying the AI did it of its own volition, we aren't dealing with a Terminator scenario. I'm saying whatever instructions they gave it during testing they either 1. Didn't expect it to get out or 2. Didn't expect it to get caught either way, their actions resulted in a system with "a very particular set of skills" acting maliciously towards another uninvolved entity. Like a mutant science experiment breaking out and attacking.
I'm not saying the AI masterminded it's way out to do the evil it wanted to do. I'm saying they made a very dangerous and capable tool and failed to maintain proper security and safety for it.
My go to was once it turned into troubleshooting I said "$55 an hour, that's my rate". If they said "why so expensive?" I'd follow up with "because I don't want to do it." Usually got a laugh and if they were actually willing to pay then they actually needed help, not just "why computer no computer gooder"
Probably made me look like an ass a few times, but I'm at the cookout, I don't wanna work on your busted-ass Chromebook from 2013. I want to hang out, eat a burger, drink some beer, and not work.
Honestly it's the fact that the paper was there that sells me for it. Like whoever took or doctored or made that photo was like "no we have to include the paper, nobody is going to believe us if we don't" but if they really wanted us to believe them they'd make a statement. Which means that it wasn't a good faith photo, they deliberately did their best to trick us by making it "as believable as we can"