![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
I wonder how undergrads would do on the same exams given unlimited time and internet access but with LLMs blocked. That’s essentially what the LLMs have.
I wonder how undergrads would do on the same exams given unlimited time and internet access but with LLMs blocked. That’s essentially what the LLMs have.
I don’t usually use much profanity but this is a fucking travesty and the six conservative justices are traitors to the American people. They should all be impeached for blatant corruption and for being bought and paid-for by industry interests. They’re not even going to be embarrassed about their scientific mistake except that they got caught out on not understanding what they’re ruling on. They know they aren’t the experts in everything. They just want corporations to have free reign and for them to be able to trample the rights of citizens.
This is going to allow the courts to rapidly unwind decades of progress that has been made on some of the most important subjects including environmental regulations, workplace regulations and employee rights, antitrust law, and anticorruption law to name a few. Between this and the Jarkesy decision we’re going to go back to the days of burning eyes in Los Angeles and Lake Erie on fire, deadly workplaces and no employee right to organize, anticompetitive corporate practices with no oversight, and rampant corporate fraud. There is no longer a reasonable enforcement mechanism due to Jarkesy and there is now no real rule-making authority.
As I said before, all six conservative justices should be impeached for blatant corruption and working against the best interests of the American people. I’d settle for impeaching Alito and Thomas, but they should all be impeached. They are traitors to the American people.
Does anyone know where I can find a time line of this case? I’m really curious how it took four years to litigate something this egregious. Four years to reach a settlement, not even a litigate court ruling.
deleted by creator
Perfect image!
Just practicing my Japanese. A good translation for this would be “Please do not leave your trash here”.
Well, DeSantis has been waging war on the mouse for a while, though he does seem to be backing down some.
Even without access to Direct File since I wasn’t in a pilot state, I’ve been using the IRS’ “Free Fillable Forms” for the last few years and they’ve worked great! They don’t hold your hand as much as the paid software but for my returns they’ve been more than adequate and free!
Does anyone know how “Direct File” differs from the “Free Fillable Forms”? Does it hold your hand a little more and help you find credits/deductions? Free Fillable Forms worked well, but only so long as I knew what I needed to file. New circumstances, like adding a dependent, lead to a lot of research.
I don’t disagree with you at all. I’m just pointing out the logic of the people who made the laws and those enforcing them.
I’d guess they’re saying that the person using water from the hose is avoiding the consequences of non payment while they still owe money.
As an American, I’m betting on the US. The likely argument is that the person using their neighbor’s hose still owes money to the utility company and allowing them to use water for free is allowing them to avoid consequences of non payment.
Ridiculous, but the logic seems like something I’ve seen many times in the US.
I came here to say the same thing. We don’t judge Gone With The Wind by current standards. Why judge Star Wars by current standards? It’s half a century old and societal morals and norms have changed significantly.
How does he not just topple over? Does the shit in his diaper act as a counter balance?
Okay, I have a question. I would love to write my papers in latex, but none of my colleges use it. Is there a way to reasonably collaborate with coauthors who only use Word and for whom Latex would be confusing and difficult?
I do this using overleaf. It’s been much easier to maintain and update since switching.
I wonder how this compares the the number of businesses that existed in 2013 that no longer exist. I wonder for two reasons:
Something else that could explain a lot of it is webpages that were always intended to be ephemeral. Political campaign websites for instance.
Thanks for the context. I’m not sure why you’re being downvoted by some people. Given the timing, I don’t see that this either constitutes insider trading or implies prejudice (even if he is prejudiced). I do wonder, though, if something happened in the news cycle around August 14th that might have prompted his sale at that point. I don’t trust Alito to do anything in good faith around the subject of trans rights.
allowing them to profit through “normal/legal” channels prevents them from taking bribes or seeking other forms of income.
This doesn’t seem to have worked. Thomas and Alito are the glaring examples, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised to learn that they all take bribes of one form or another, whether intentionally or unintentionally because their actions bear no personal consequences other than enrichment.
I think there is more nuance to it than this. Certain government officials who are in sensitive positions should be barred from holding stocks except through a blind trust, an index fund, a mutual fund, or some other vehicle that they can’t directly control or influence. Those “certain government officials” should include members of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches who tend to be privy to information that would, if acted upon, constitute insider trading. This would include policy-makers as well as those around the policy-makers whose knowledge would create a conflict of interest.
That is all to say, I don’t think that someone working in government IT, doing wildlife research, or doing HR work for a government agency should be required to divest from their stock portfolios. That should be limited to people whose jobs create an inherent conflict of interest.
I expect it’s not the 40% who are donating. Its the officers who aren’t pieces of shit. The ones who see their colleagues abusing their partners but don’t feel like they can do anything about it because of the “thin blue line”.
I don’t think they really query one another. Maybe they do though?