RIH? rest in hell…

Ah. Thanks. You took a left turn and I was looking right.

Too many him and hers… who?

If a super virus that could kill us all escaped… you would hear about it like this.

Good to know your true colors.

I think a fair number of people don’t watch or read the news. And I don’t really blame them. But when it co,es to the uneducated who do… the ones I know (very small data size) believed that the bad things about trump were fake news. And I get that. The news media is pretty blatant with all the clickbait and sensationalization of the news. They have plenty of reason to distrust it. It takes a lot of effort to keep up with which news sources are still mostly reliable. I don’t see a lot of uneducated people who are working manual labor jobs having the energy and motivation to put in that kind of effort. And the article makes a subtle point. The gov wasn’t improving his life, so he voted for someone different, hoping for change.

I will admit way back when trump ran in 2016, I thought maybe the fact that he was getting real attention might shake things up. I assumed he would lose like he always did over the years. Yet, he certainly has shaken things up. Maybe in the long run, we might see some real change. I kinda doubt it, but who knows. The rise of the social democrates or whatever we are calling them is at least a step forward.

I understand his anger in general. They just doesn’t differentiate freind or foe when they vent their anger. That said, I explained in a direct response to them how it’s still not technically tax funded. They actually alude to that when they say “everyone involved knew where the money came from”. The organizations used loopholes to indirectly pay for those building. Those loop holes would ensure they are not technically tax funded. So a ban on tax funding religious buildings wouldn’t apply.

So if I assume those building you speak of were paid for by the grants the link mentioned. What are theynused for. Cause the grants are to pay an organization to provide social services.

If you pay an organization with tax money to provide a service, assumably with some profit built in. And they use the profit to build a building… you are stretching to call is tax funded. And my point holds up to this. A ban on tax funded religious building would not legally ban this.

Your pretty antagonistic to someone who litterally wants the same thing as you. I just want to be sure people are rallying around something that will actually achieve the goal. I want religious organization to recieve no special treatment compare to any other. Removing their tax exempt status is the goal with the biggest impact. Entirely getting rid of the office of faith based … is also a great goal. And I support doing that too. Banning tax funded structure for religious organizations wouldn’t do anything.

Think about it. They could sell the land and buildings to a charity they control that rents the church back to them. Then get the grants to build the gyms and such. Their core finances are still under a religious organization, but the buildings are technically owned by a non-religious organization.

But… at a certain point, lack of a decent education, critical thinking or intelligence becomes the driving cause. And that isn’t their fault. So it is hard to say someone like the guy in the story truely deserved this. He deserved better. He deserved to be protected by those who had the mental capacity and education to see the reality of trump. Those who saw it, and supported it anyway are the ones who deserve to pay the price.

Thats not how tax funded works. Tax funded is when the gov uses tax money to pay for something. What you are describing is paying for something using tax savings from tax exempt status. If you supported a bill banning tax funded religous buildings, I don’t think it would stop anything currently happening right now.

I think it’s more than that. Because most churches aren’t supporting all that. It feels more like critical thinking is slowly creeping into the part of the population that frequented churches. And also, all the scandals are helping people see that their religion is run by humans, with all the corruption that brings.

There is a difference between tax funded and tax exempt. I say this because we should be specifically asking that the tax exempt status for religions be removed from the tax code.

Layers are out because I spend half my day wishing I wasn’t wearing a shirt at all. Constantly warm. I call in manopause, lol. Screen printed art sounds good, but where can you get it on quality shirts. It always seems to be on low quality materials when I see it.

So what do you wear? I want to reduce the amount of ads I wear, but plain tshirts don’t look so good with my extra belly weight. I need something on the shirt. But what? And I commonly just wear shorts, so it can’t look remotely formal.

But it also says “suggesting the developers…” he bounces around. Talking about agents, developers, and users interchangeably. But they aren’t.

Yeah, I follow ya. Different approaches, but aiming for the same goal.

As for this women. I have worked for some smaller companies, and some large. It seems to me that the role of the CEO is often more a marketing role. They use their connections to get deals done and such. Though a bank may be different. They aren’t selling per se to businesses, but I would guess the role of CEO there is also part of getting bigger clients to keep their money at the bank. So I can see how even off the clock comments can vastly undermine their job performance. Where as for most of us it wouldn’t. But I can also imagine there are probably companies out there with CEOs for which they aren’t really just interacting with customers, but actually spending the majority of their time managing the company. So yeah, maybe a blanket exception doesn’t fit.

Thanks for confirming you have no idea what you are talking about.

It is not possible. I work with AI, and not as just a user. Generally it is not possible to prove a negative (plenty of exceptions though). And I already said why in my comment. So Why don’t you go ahead and say why it is possible. Oh you didn’t… cause you don’t know the technicals… so you just claim I am wrong and an idiot.
I will give you a bit of a taste. AI is a program. It runs on a computer. When you turn on the computer, the AI is not running. You must start it. And when it starts, it either does nothing, waiting for a prompt, or it executes a prompt it was instructed to execute on start up. So… it always starts from a prompt one way or another.
AI is simply a next word predictor. It needs to have some prompt from which to predict the next word. And even if you want to drift out of the standard llm, which clearly we are discussing, something has to kick it off, that might be baked into the application, but AI requires an input, so while you can automate that first input, it still didn’t come from the AI.

I just don’t see it that way. If I buy a kid friendly toy that speaks. And it is advertised as saying nothing tiny children shouldn’t hear. Then I press the red button, and it screams out the N word. Am I to blame? Of course not. AI are often marketed to schools and such with significant promises of what they will do. If a kid tells it to do something it isn’t supposed to let them do, and it does it. Is it the kids fault? The school who bought it and let th3 kid have unsupervised access to it for 5 minutes. I don’t think so.

Interesting. I had not noticed that. I wonder if it is because of the lame at will employment laws. Basically they don’t have to say why they fired you at all. I think those are crap. But I agree that the rank and file employees should have the protection to have a private life. I just think there is a reasonable line between them and the official corporate positions at least.