“It’s expensive, but I still want everything, so I pirated it. Seems pretty justified.”
Look, I’ve pirated a ton in my life, but this whole “This is actually a noble pursuit” is such a load of fucking horse shit. We want something and don’t want to pay the price that is required to get it, so we take it. The best part is “preserving” it, because we all know that when this guy is done playing, it will be deleted and he’ll never think of it again.
You know it’s funny how many times I’ve heard that “it’s just predictive text algorithms!” As a dismissal that I’m beginning to think we’re just predictive text algorithms.
legal verbiage is such a pointless waste and almost unnecessary
Wow. I like the rest of your position, but being precise in language, and understanding what things mean legally is extremely important.
If having no clue what most people need is the metric, were eliminating pretty much everyone from consideration.
One of my biggest pet peeves is when someone uses multiple question marks at the end of a statement. I’m triggered right now and reporting you for harassment. Lol
What am I missing? I don’t see in that article where it indicates that the us is blocking it, nor the evidence they have that supports it.
I haven’t taught my kids. . .yet.
However, they know that if they can’t find something they want to watch, they just have to ask me and I’ll get it from them. . .and that (sarcastically) “daddy is just borrowing it from the internet” so I think know what’s going on.
A crowd of 10,000 people means fuck all compared to 158,429,631.
I agree that it would be a bad data set, but not because it is too small. That size would actually give you a pretty good result if it was sufficiently random. Which is, of course, the problem.
But you’re missing the point: just because something is obvious to you does not mean it’s actually true. The model could be trained in a way to not be biased by our number choice, but to actually be pseudo-random. Is it surprising that it would turn out this way? No. But to think your assumption doesn’t need to be proven, in such a case, is almost equivalent to thinking a Trump rally is a good data sample for determining the opinion of the general public.
“we don’t need to prove the 2020 election was stolen, it’s implied because trump had bigger crowds at his rallies!” -90% of trump supporters
Another good example is the Monty Hall “paradox” where 99% of people are going to incorrectly tell you the chance is 50% because they took math and that’s how it works.
Just because something seems obvious to you doesn’t mean it is correct. Always a good idea to test your hypothesis.
Windows bad, ai bad. Upvote. Thought isn’t a big consideration here.
People are able to tell apart BS, though.
Please help me be optimistic. Why do you think this is the case? No matter where I go I see mostly confirmation bias and the lack of even the most basic level of critical thought.
I was going to joke “wow, a whole 4 years?”
Yes but this continues to be true. The top level poster implied that at some point is was true, but it is no longer true. It’s never been reasonably possibly in the us and nothing has changed recently to make it meaningfully less possible.
deleted by creator
You’re probably going to get a temp ban for Zionism. Lol
This is the beauty of not consuming any MSM: you can believe it has said or not said anything you need it to have in order to confirm your beliefs.
would also take issue with you characterizing what Israel is doing as “fighting back” and “self defense”.
Literally in the next sentence I make it obvious I don’t believe this is the case. And this is upvoted. Amazing how irrational people can be.
Removed by mod
Are you arguing that they weren’t attacked? And you’re laughing at me. Lmao
This is a much more honest answer, one that I also agree with.