Republicans don’t by default have anything against gays.
Because hey, every time they do everything against gays there’s an excuse! There’s been loads and loads of excuses over the years, but hey, they really don’t have anything against gays!
They say migrants, but mean asylum seekers. While actively encouraging as much as possible foreign workers for e.g. ASML. Asylum seekers only make up a tiny portion of the migrants. Knowledge workers however, …
Netherlands had a right wing government. They messed up greatly. People voted even more right because “obviously” the previous government was actually left wing.
Perception matters a lot for a large group of people.
And it’s funny because when certain parties make promises there interpretation differs depending if they like the party or not.
E.g. making promises to improve things: who will pay for it? E.g. left wing is spending money they don’t have, or they care too much about lazy people.
If a right wing party makes a promise to improve things and financially it is pretty much certain it’ll not work out: don’t be negative, just saying that because of x/y/z.
It’s too easy to blame left wing parties for what is happening. Pretty sure there’s various causes, and people often aren’t logical or rational.
It would be great if media wasn’t allowed to repeat such obvious lies. Media should be free to say what they want, but there should be consequences. If you spread lies then there should be consequences to it. And it shouldn’t require a hugely expensive court case that’ll get dragged on for at least a decade.
For me Firefox often prevents the system from going to idle. If some page has a video it often seems to inhibit going to idle. Firefox strangely does that even if the video is paused.
For me and Firefox I’m often intend to do something about it. And then I don’t for various reasons 😂
Not Gen II reactors, which could be [built and running only 4-5 years after the beginning of the construction
Pretty much every nuclear reactor that’s recently been built has been crazily over budget and significantly late. It seems it is usually a decade later than planned.
Anyway, the beginning of construction is a highly misleading timeframe. There’s a long process before construction even starts. Not unique to nuclear reactors.
I dislike nuclear reactor discussions because of similar arguments. E.g. “new technology” fixes some problem, while ignoring the drawbacks. Or when it is pointed out that the approval process can take ages there’s often the “just force it through”. For years I’ve seen people advocate for SMRs. Which turn out to be to have loads of drawbacks, yet again.
If someone says that it’ll take 15 years then the person didn’t solely mean the actual construction. They mean from wanting it to having it working.
If a city decides on a new area for homes the actual construction of those homes is just a tiny part of the whole process. If you buy such a new home there can be a huge difference to when you signed for it and when construction starts. The contract is about start until end of construction, the mortgage around it is not, at least in Netherlands.
From what was said on Meidas Touch, a defense lawyer should be fairly independent. They should direct the best strategy. In this case the “strategy” seemed to be directed by Trump. It’s not just the quality of the lawyer, it’s also that the lawyer let the client dictate most of the defense.
Interesting how often you mentioned that this person often actively does not investigate things. This due to their own reasoning being more important than the law.
Then apparently the county is also the highest in meth. I’m guessing that again they’re ignoring things (e.g. reports) because of their own reasons. Which then results in way more meth than it could be.
If true, suggest to wonder why meth reports would be ignored…
I also don’t see why any content generated by an LLM could or should be illegal.
Cannot see how it could be illegal? If it does something against a law it’ll be illegal. Just because there’s some technology involved doesn’t absolve that from laws.
I remember a case where someone complained about the incorrect statement an LLM produced about some public figure. The judge ruled it had to be corrected.
Loads of people are repeatedly saying that Biden oud somehow not something to vote for. While Trump would be a good candidate? Your argument just doesn’t make sense. There is a huge difference between these two.
Edit: further reflection, people easily forget history. But Biden won against Trump. Though less relevant now due to right wing media distorting things. People seem to have forgotten what Trump is like as president.