Couldn’t properly tell the story in an 80 hour show; it’s okay, though - a 2 hour movie will do the trick.

Ah man, that’s awesome! Thanks for randomly mentioning this, you just made my keyboard experience 100% better.

Wait, Keychron Assistant works on Chromium? Are you on Linux? Big if true, I thought it just didn’t work on Linux period.

I think about this a lot. So many technologies that we have, if we could trust everyone involved to be acting in humanity’s best interest, would be amazing. If we didn’t have to guard our personal data like Fort Knox, there’s so many great things we could do with extensive connectedness. If we didn’t have to doubt the sincerity of everyone who promotes a service or product, everything would be so much better.

We can’t have any of those things, because humans are shitty, and are as a whole just in it for themselves.

This is brilliant.

Applications (and websites) can definitely allow / deny copy/paste into specific text fields; I’m not sure if they could disable it for the entire browser as a whole but I can’t imagine they’d ever do so even if it’s possible.

Hear me out here: Kobolds.

What if it’s a collage of AI generated art pieces? Technically the artist did the same amount of work as someone making a collage of human-created things.

I mean, you could make the same argument for paint brushes for traditional art. Or pencils. There’s a really big difference between someone using a tablet and an Undo hotkey to draw something digitally vs. someone making something with AI. One of those clearly requires a ton of skill; one does not require any.

I wonder what percentage has to be created by a human to be eligible for copyright. For example, if someone generates an AI image and then changes a few pixels, is that human-created? What if they over-paint 30% of the image? 50%? What if someone creates something in Photoshop from scratch, but they use Photoshop’s in-built AI driven tools to enhance it?

Either anything that uses AI in any capacity is uncopyrightable, or there has to be a line somewhere, so… Where is it?

You offer no solutions, suggestions, or even counter-points - only negativity and nay saying. Frankly, that makes me not really give a shit about your opinion.

There is nothing you can say to convince me otherwise because I have reality as evidence.

Then there’s especially no point in discussing this further with you.

Well, if that’s your takeaway from all that, I guess there’s very little point in trying to discuss this further with you.

Protests don’t have to be about intimidating anyone. They’re important as a tool for letting other people, who might also want to resist, know that they are not alone. I’m guessing based on your phrasing that you aren’t from the US, so I’m going to assume you aren’t familiar with how things work over here. It’s a big country, in terms of landmass. The US is almost as large as the entirety of Europe (~3.5m sq. miles vs. ~3.9m sq. miles.) It’s essentially impossible to coordinate anything over that large an area, especially considering how spread out everything is. Organized protests like the No Kings events, though, present a unified front across the country, and let everyone know that people everywhere feel the same way they do, and even though they might only have immediate contact to their local community, the resistance is much larger than that.

“Standing up to our oppressors” is also more difficult than you seem to think. It’s really easy to sit there behind a keyboard in another part of the world and type big words, but it’s a lot harder to commit to an armed resistance that will, in all likelihood, result in dying. The US military is huge, and mega-funded. Local law enforcement is very likely to be on the establishment’s side. They’re all armed and don’t hesitate to quash even peaceful resistance with violence. How do you think it’s going to go when someone starts shooting back?

For a true resistance to be effective, it needs to be organized and coordinated, and that’s simply very difficult to accomplish. I certainly don’t know how to do it. Do you?

Or are you just advocating for people to go die in ineffectual attempts to assassinate government officials?

It’s pretty far from fine, but regardless, this is the midterms; he’s not running for anything.

Hey OP, if you don’t edit in the link to the article in question, your post is on Death Row.

This is the crux. It’s not about voting for genocide or not genocide; it’s about voting for genocide, or genocide with a side of fascism. There’s a clearly better choice. If you’re a left-leaning person and you choose to vote third party instead of voting for the less- or non-fascist candidate, you’re not only wasting your vote, but you’re directly contributing to things like we’re experiencing right now. If you think Harris would have been worse for the country, or for Gaza, than Trump is, I think you’re delusional.

I’m fully convinced that the people who promote that sort of rhetoric are either astroturfers trying to convince people to waste their vote, or just don’t understand how the voting process works in the US.

SatansMaggotyCumFart has the right of it: Push progressive candidates in the primary, but don’t let perfect be the enemy of good in the general. If you vote third party in the general because the neither of the two viable candidates perfectly aligns with your desires, it’s every bit as bad as a centrist deciding to vote for the GOP candidate. Vote for whichever of those candidates is better.

Of course not, just like rich non-citizens will be welcome to keep their accounts. The rules only apply to the poors.

She wasn’t “my” candidate, any more than Donald Trump was “your” candidate. I voted against Donald Trump. Folks who voted third party didn’t do that. They may not have voted for him, but they didn’t vote against him.

This, really, is what gets me about billionaires. Literally any of them could have just faded into obscurity years ago, lived a life of abject luxury and never had a single worry. Or, they could have spent like 10% of their wealth on improving things for society as a whole, and everyone would have loved them for it. But no - they all had to just focus on hoarding more and more and making things worse and worse for everyone else. It’s fucking baffling to me.

Ah, yes. Because that’s the most objectionable part of that opinion, not ‘We should jail people for their voting behavior’. Can you get any more authoritarian?

Edit: But sure, if that’s where we’re going, I’ll bite:

It was a two party race. There were no other viable candidates. You didn’t vote against Trump in any meaningful way; you did nothing to prevent our current situation, and that’s a pretty wild stance to be defending.