you need to codify that the AI agent can’t be responsible and determined who is (the company or the model creator)
Sure. But that’s not exactly what the proposed law is though?
These companies all want to be captured, “we’re so dangerous, America is going to get destroyed if we’re not mainlined into that $1 trillion/year ‘defense’ budget!”
Yes, the government, not the EPA. The EPA didn’t have the funding nor legal mandate to tackle such a problem when it was first discovered. It doesn’t justify calling them useless.
So the EPA, which was first founded in December 1970, is responsible for Love Canal and not Hooker Chemical? You mean the problem that came to attention in 1977, was declared as a federal disaster in 1978, and was the first ever Superfund site? That useless EPA?
If the EPA didn’t exist, Hooker Chemical wouldn’t have dumped their toxic waste there… 50+ years prior, those wacky time travelers, am I right?
Do you also call firefighters useless when they aren’t able to extinguish a fire in time?
Yeah, I get that. But there hasn’t been any draft yet, so everyone on that boat has voluntarily joined the military.
I’m not good with OSM; do you normally add pictures to the POI? Because you can’t have a pokestop without a picture I don’t think?
Has there been a draft yet, or what do you mean?
I love Oxford commas, but I don’t see how that’d help with the students’ first, hand-job experience.
No, it doesn’t need to be. You just have it be opt-in, client-side.
it’s only legal if you agreed to the fee when you first took out the debt
Which is most likely defined in their terms.
There must be a way to pay without fee.
According to whom? As far as I’m aware, there’s no such law in the US regarding private companies. So they can be jerks if they want to.
You’d think so, but then she doesn’t actually want it, and you either need to gorge it down or waste it.
Am I uneducated about how SNAP works, or is this a rare Texas W?
I think it’s outrageous that you can’t even buy hygiene articles or medicines with SNAP, and in that way it’d make sense that something so non-nutritious like candy shouldn’t be allowed? Alcohol isn’t allowed either for example, despite the fact that beer would be (at least marginally) more nutritious than candy.
So other than increasing the stigma already associated with SNAP, is it really problematic to ban candy? Even if it’s not a major cost point, the principle of “poor people are too dumb to budget themselves, so we won’t let them buy necessities like diapers and tampons… but we’ll gladly let them buy candy” just feels wrong to me?
If your playbooks don’t include an autoremove, you’re doing it wrong!
Or rather, lessons learned from when the default /boot partition was only like 100 MB.
No, that’s because she’s a big fan of cosmetic surgeries.
Only nerds want idempotent build results, it’s so fun debugging slop…
You’re forgetting the 12% exception, but they’d probably need an even larger amount than that.
Dolly Parton or violet, who knows.
It feels like EU Directive 2014/109 chickened out in comparison to those pics. Especially all the warning labels regarding children or fertility… a large portion of the imagery is almost comedic, showing that your balls will explode, and that babies will mooch your cigs.
Translation: “my country” = America, “my own people” = genocidal Zionists. Great take. I’m sure all the dead women and children in Palestine would be so proud of you.
For real, how does everyone in the media bother to feign such cognitive dissonance all the time? When someone says they’re against the war in Iran, does that mean they want to kill all Americans?
Who falls for this shit? Zionists need to find something better than playing the victim card 24/7.