We already have a great slogan. E pluribus unum. The idea that people from different places, backgrounds, and walks of life all come together for one cause, the betterment of all, that’s something to rally behind. The US hasn’t ever stood for that, but it’s something to strive for at least. What they’re offering has been rejected by the world time and time again and will continue to be. What they’re peddling is shameful and I’m disgusted that anyone is falling for this.

The link says it was over a fort having been seized. Though I’m not pro war, that seems like a pretty standard reason to go to war. It says it was not actually over a bucket.

I read the article and his issue with women is that they can’t be trusted and that their emotions change. This man is going to be completely unable to deal with children. Empathy and compassion and soothing are skills you hone in adult relationships and can use when you’re raising kids. There’s no way this guy deals with a kids outbursts or problems in a healthy way.

I didn’t call anyone rude, so it’s possible you ment to reply to someone else, but the OP I was referring to is the person who posted the meme. They are in my replies and appear to be as bad faith as I assumed. It seems like you and I are in agreement that Maduro was a bad guy but the US had no right to abduct him. OP was asking why he was a bad guy and the person I responded to correctly assessed he was asking in bad faith. It seems like you already know he’s a bad guy. My comment was left to support the position he was a bad guy, but I don’t want to engage with someone who obviously has no interest in talking about the facts. I just wanted to add the context of his actions because I’m sure many people don’t actually know why he was widely hated.

I don’t think training on all public information is super ethical regardless, but to the extent that others may support it, I understand that SO may be seen as fair game. To my knowledge though, all the big AIs I’m aware of have been trained on GitHub regardless of any individual projects license.

It’s not about proving individual code theft, it’s about recognizing the model itself is built from theft. Just because an AI image output might not resemble any preexisting piece of art doesn’t mean it isn’t based on theft. Can I ask what you used that was trained on just a projects documentation? Considering the amount of data usually needed for coherent output, I would be surprised if it did not need some additional data.

Yea, that’s also my experience. I liked it a lot more when they stuck to specific instances, but here we are. I just added the above because I’m sure there’s at least a handful of well intentioned people that legitimately don’t know and won’t be interested enough to look it up, even if they believe you. Americans at least, myself included, aren’t always up to date on foreign affairs, even when our government is doing the meddling.

I agree that OP is speaking in bad faith right now, so I’m just gonna leave this here for any passersby and not engage with OP directly.

From Wikipedias first section: Maduro was widely considered to have been leading an authoritarian government, characterized by electoral fraud, human rights abuses, corruption, censorship and severe economic hardship.[28] The United Nations (UN) and Human Rights Watch have alleged that under Maduro’s administration thousands of people died in extrajudicial killings and seven million Venezuelans were forced to flee the country due to economic collapse.

If you acknowledge the problem with theft from artists, do you not acknowledge there’s a problem with theft from coders? Code intended to be fully open source with licenses requiring derivatives to be open source is now being served up for closed source uses at the press of a button with no acknowledgement.

For what it’s worth, I think AI would be much better in a post scarcity moneyless society, but so long as people need to be paid for their work I find it hard to use ethically. The time it might take individuals to do the things offloaded to AI might mean a company would need to hire an additional person if they were not using AI. If AI were not trained unethically then I’d view it as a productivity tool and so be it, but because it has stolen for its training data it’s hard for me to view it as a neutral tool.

Not everyone is eligible for subsidies. My understanding is that they are basically federal assistance for low income families. Single people making more than 62,600 (which is 4 times the poverty level) for example will not be eligible for any assistance and their premiums have potentially risen over 25% just this year. That’s a lot of money, even for someone not on the poverty line.

I wonder if open enrollment extension will allow people to change plans. If someone could only afford a catastrophic plan without aid, will they be able to change to a better plan with aid? I have not seen articles mention open enrollment extension, but I’m glad to hear it’s being discussed. Obviously that doesn’t help the people who need healthcare today, but it at least is something.

I hate that articles don’t seem to mention that:

1. Premium cost have already risen this year, in part due to companies expecting less people paying into insurance. That affects everyone regardless of subsidy eligibility and they will not be lowered if this magically passes.
2. Open enrollment ends soon and many families have already chosen to go without because they can’t afford it. Reinstating these subsidies will not, to my knowledge, allow them to retroactively enroll.

So healthcare is more expensive for everyone now and the people who were eligible for these subsidies may never see them because they don’t have healthcare anymore. This is disgraceful.

Based on the other comments, some DMs seem to have an issue with that. Did they give a reason? I am extremely confused because I’m pretty sure that’s not just the archetype, but also just RAW for rogue. Is there some ambiguity in the wording of the class that I’m just missing?

I don’t know her particular situation, but if she needed “non-emergency” medical care, it’s possible it’s only covered in the state. I don’t know why she went in or disclosed, but if she went in for something non life threatening it’s possible it’d be out of pocket anywhere else.

Why did you comment twice? I already explained that the person you responded to is not asking anyone to care. They are agreeing that Americans knew what they were doing.

They are not expecting sympathy though.

Someone said “I have very little sympathy for America” and they replied that we don’t deserve it. They agreed.

I’m pretty sure they mean we don’t deserve the sympathy. If you take into account their whole comment, it seems like they are saying sympathy is undeserved because people knew what they were getting.

I can’t guarantee it, but I’d guess the girl is talking about their period. I don’t think that him giving advice is helpful in this context and from your comment it seems like maybe that wasn’t how you understood the comic. Just adding that because it seems like your comment has a good intent but might not relate to how some people interpret the comic.

Thank you for your insight. I might try cutting just one to see how it goes. If it starts outgrowing its pot after I’ll try repotting and then I’ll at least know if they’ll start getting needy before I commit to repotting them all. Fingers crossed.

I understand how it might be personally upsetting, but products should have warnings and health guidelines before the instructions. If I’m supposed to wear gloves before touching something, I sure hope I see that before I see how to use it. This is actually good in my opinion. People might not actually read it all, but at least safety information is front loaded.

I believe I got into a conversation on Lemmy where I was saying that there should be a big persistent warning banner stuck on every single AI chat app that “the following information has no relation to reality” or some other thing. The other person kept insisting it was not needed. I’m not saying it would stop all of these events, but it couldn’t hurt.

I’d love to pretend I have a tried and true method, but statistically I’ve hit more walls than bridges. The thing that works more often than others is finding something they care about that’s easily falsifiable and honing in on that. Do that a few times in a row and hopefully they see that they don’t actually know what they’re talking about because their politicians don’t want them to. One of the easiest for me has been to really explain the gun show loophole. Guns seem to be pretty important to people I interact with, even if they don’t own any. They really have no idea what gun laws are. One of the other more recent things is Hegseths changes and the Trump ballroom. Depending on how tech bro they are and how willing or able you are to keep them on topic, DOGE isn’t too bad, but it can get off track fast. If she’s spiteful, the new Trump accounts might be worth bringing up. It’s really not a bad idea, but that’s HER taxes going to a bunch of babies.