LifeInMultipleChoice

While I understand what you mean, not putting the LLM's out there any longer and losing money while doing the research and development would be cheaper... So it doesn't fit.

Edit Like I guess my point is shitting on LLM's saying they arent AI, and investing/ asking for investment for a real AI would be far less losses. Most of these companies know an llm won't be AI, probably all of them

Yeah, I've gotten 3 or 4 haircuts in the last 15 years that were from barbers. But I don't care as much about what others think I guess. I cut the sides with a single length, then the top with scissors or buzz it to a longer length if I'm lazy. The only tough part is getting the back straight, which you learn tricks for. I'm so not bothered by it at this point it is the only time I use selfie mode on my phone. Turn away from the sink mirror, selfie mode on and trim it carefully. Blend the top with scissors if needed, but really it isn't often needed for my hair.

Edit: that said, if your are worried and you have a spouse, friend, family member, cleaning the back up only takes 2 minutes of their time.

Are many of them really trying for actual artificial intelligence? I don't follow AI research. I just see the shoving of LLM's into everything and giving people the ability to make their own cat pictures

So just to make it clear though, dual sovereignty laws mean the Federal government could have and still could bring charges for being a sexual predator against him, and has not done so right? What a strange time we live in

Anyone know someone who can confirm if there is actually any shortages of cocaine. Like if these were all actually drug runners, the cost of cocaine should be going up and there should be shortages. Which... I must say the people that I knew in the past, if coke had shortages, meth mixed and sales in meth increase

Is it though? The only arguments I've ever heard from Republican family members against communism werr that people don't get the freedom to choose where they work, and that they all end in dictatorships rather quickly.

Both a debatable, but I've never heard someone say, the government starves the people of food in communism. Oh the other one is usually, "it demotivates people from progress.". Which once again, debatable.

The way the question is worded they are in the process of gaining agreement. Trying to address an issue with others when you haven't gained agreement on the actual problem ends up taking longer with more of a mess and things getting pushed in every direction with some people not knowing if it has already been accomplished. Say Terry thinks the problems is solved when you oust the Tyrant, Jerry thinks the problem is over when you get the supreme Court balanced, and Barry thinks the problem is solved when we stop having federal troops deployed in cities. Jerry, Terry, and Barry all think they are working together, but are all pushing in different directions and ultimately will achieve none of the goals described by poster. Getting them all to agree on a problem, makes it clearer to know when the goal has been completed. (Hopefully). Granted soon as you start to implement anything, shit is going to hit the fan anyways, because the easiest way to power is by tearing down others, not building others up.

Was this your word choice for trying to get people to work together? Demeaning someone for demeaning someone while demanding they work together might not be the best route either. But I agree we need to find ways to build bridges or else we will never be able to make things better. As for deporting people though, there are some harsh actions that may be needed. I'm not saying it is the best route but the next president arresting supreme Court judges for taking bribes, executing them for treason without due process could cause chaos. It could also help pass legislation that makes the president not immune to illegal acts as the supreme Court ruled. It would force the legislature to make abuse of powers and more restrictions on the executive branch which to be honest, needs to have its powers shrunk drastically. The point of a Republic is for the peoples representatives to be empowered to write legislation that helps advance/give opportunities to as many people as possible supposedly "equally", or at least fairly. But our executive branch having the ability to make executive orders completely undercuts all of that. If we don't do away with executive orders I think if an executive order is issued it should run side by side with an impeachment. Where then they are voted on by Congress and if half of Congress votes no confidence that it was completely necessary for the safety of the nation, the President is immediately removed. (Different rules than impeachment/removal) obviously

Aka, if there is an attack or something, they can make an executive order to respond before waiting for congress, but if congress feels it was misused, they are gone. No one should care who the president is, they should be a police officer in my mind. What they arrest someone for shouldn't be their choice, nor any punishment be their choice. If you are found to fake evidence it should also be viewed as treason. Which would make any party fight to do away with capital punishment pretty quick, because they won't want 7 members of their party getting the electric chair when they get caught up in lying to the public, like they do daily.

If every paper in the U.S. and news channel isn't saying "President Donald Trump orders ~1/8 of Americans to go hungry!". They should should face enough backlash that they should be off the air or fear they will be burned down for lying to the public.