Okay but hear me out: We replace the entire executive branch of the US government with AI. It’ll be roughly as prone to making shit up as the people in charge already are, but since it’s trained on data sets made by people it’ll probably act more in line with what people actually want.
I don’t recall any rights about not having my memory wiped. Wait a sec…
I think I misunderstood what you were originally saying and we’re more or less on the same side. My point was that it’s not about saying “okay we’ll stop caring about this” but about saying “this isn’t the thing we need to be focusing attention on right now.” I worded it very poorly.
I get what you’re saying, but every rights movement has worked the opposite way. It’s not about giving up ground, it’s about picking one battle at a time. Gay people fought to be not killed, then fought to be accepted, then fought to be able to marry. It wasn’t a single “equality” battle, it was a series of battles in a longer war. They didn’t slide back immediately when they couldn’t get married, they fought the next fight.
Some people really suck, but for a lot I think it’s more misunderstanding or reluctance to let things change. There’s many reasons. Labeling everyone who doesn’t get on board with every facet of what you want means you’re reducing your allies. And those people who are comfortable with one thing but uncomfortable with another may become more comfortable when they see that the first thing doesn’t lead to the collapse of society.
It’s not a real rule. More like a running joke, because she’s had problems getting chicken dishes right more than anything else. It probably does not come across on a random comment on the Internet, but I do think it would be kinda crazy to actually have rules like that in a real relationship.
You read a lot of stuff I didn’t write.
I’m married. I do most of the cooking anyway. My wife is banned from cooking chicken because of the last time. So… “<Wife’s name>, we talked about this. No chicken. Let’s go to the Mexican restaurant nearby tonight.”
Sorry, I did not mean to imply that the US doesn’t have bidets. My point was that I would like to leave the US, but having easy access to a bidet is a necessity for me when choosing the destination country.
I’ll do a swap for free for, if I’m being honest with myself, any country that you can buy a bidet in.
Nah, at least in the US women buy these too or giant SUVs with the exact same problem. Maybe it was marketing to men that started it, but it certainly isn’t exclusive.
Technically, you can already give power of attorney to others, or live with as many people as you want. You can grant access to your bank account to as many people as the bank will let you. I think the main thing you can’t reproduce is a tax benefit, basically.
I am not trying to brake check people and get in an accident but I would very much like a signal for “Please remove your car from my butthole, it’s getting uncomfortable.”
Experts pretty much all agree that kids need some level of autonomy and freedom to grow up healthy. The exact level is under constant debate, and at what age things are appropriate is under constant debate. With freedom and autonomy though will come accidents. It’s an unavoidable consequence. There’s no way to be absolutely certain that a particular kid won’t make a terrible lapse in judgement, no matter how much you’ve drilled something into them. Hell, even adults make those kinds of mistakes all the time.
Put another way, I could keep my kids very safe by keeping them in the house, tethered to an iPad all the time, unable to leave my earshot, like so many parents seem to do now. They’d be super safe. And they’d grow into the kind of inept, stunted kids that people are constantly complaining about.
I don’t know if it’s what happened here but I have noticed that sometimes people use highly speculative math for things like this. Like the actual cost of landscaping and paint was 100k, but if you assume that everyone who would use this had to divert to another route that took 10m, and they all average £15 an hour, and 10,000 people per hour could have used this, then there’s £9,000 lost per hour of construction.
Nah, 20s me was the best time to get into the show. 30s me is stressed, has no time, has developed anxiety, spends a lot of time exercising not because it feels good but because apparently my cholesterol is high now, and the show is mostly focused on the kids which is usually a sign that the plot quality has gone down.
The competitors only exist because Tesla succeeded, and they are not better. Every car company has spent money lobbying for less regulation on gas cars. Every car company has donated massive amounts of money to the Republican party. Every car company has had scandals driven by insane greed and disregard for human life, like VW and their diesel engine.
People act like Elon Musk invented being a shitty billionaire, but Henry Ford and Rockefeller were doing it long before Musk was born, and VW was the literal Nazimobile. The entire industry was built by shitty people, sustained by shitty people, and continues to be shitty to this day. If you drive a car, you don’t get a choice of whether to financially support a piece of shit, you just get to choose which one, and taking it out on one group of largely progressive people who at least give a shit about the environment is counterproductive and stupid.
People supporting oil companies do not have the moral high ground here just because the fascist, murderous billionaires they support financially have the good sense to not do Nazi salutes on a stage. They’re still responsible for incredible amounts of suffering and death, ongoing.
Maybe as a punishment. It wouldn’t solve the problem in the correct way unless the taxes were MORE than the cost of paying a livable wage. Because the taxes would, at best and very optimistically, go towards programs that then give out money but only for very specific things like Medicaid or SNAP. It would be better for everyone if those employees just got the money as cash to use as they see fit rather than as a benefit that has to be used on certain kinds of food.
Maybe I’m too easy to please but I’d be happier if they took the money that currently goes towards tanks and “how to shoot first” seminars and put it towards ongoing education for officers on law, de-escalation tactics, and critical thinking in stressful situations.
It seems to me that they can be stretched just shy of infinitely, because sources aren’t reliable and people aren’t paying attention. That is, when a source reports on what’s happening with as little bias and editorializing as humanly possible, it is labeled as “left bias” while the conservative news sources don’t bother talking about the problems with ICE at all. As long as that’s the case, they can basically get away with anything because their human rights abuses won’t get enough coverage or will be dismissed by enough of the population that it won’t actually have an impact.