I might not underestimate how much big tech companies hate this too. They are pretty famous about despising all regulation of their space. I wouldn’t put it past them to block a backwater like Utah.

Is it as simple as 38% approve and 62% disapprove? Many polls have something in the middle for “neither approve nor disapprove.”

In those polls, the disapproval rate can move without anything changing in the approval rating, and that’s worth reporting.

Just saying It isn’t entirely either/or.

Yeah the analysis has to start with the fact that a majority of American voters chose this.

Congressional Democrats shut the government down for a record length of time in refusal to fund ICE.

There are a million other things they didn’t do, but they did do this one thing.

But don’t you understand that gay people merely existing prevents these people from pursuing their own religion, which includes the serene knowledge that the entire world is like them?? /s

Anything except enthusiastic Christianity is “anti-Christian” to these people. Fuck them all.

Why are you assuming the ambulance is the first car behind the Waymo? Are they supposed to bash through all traffic to get to the Waymo and then push it? You know a lot of ambulance drivers are just low level private employees with a couple weeks of training, right? They’re not going to just use the ambulance like a tank and then tell their corporate ambulance company employer to sue Waymo, a huge and powerful tech company. Christ man join reality.

Gee we’d never have known without you, eh?

Because they were raised Catholic and they want their church to stop demonizing them. Blessing them would be a start. People are taught religion from a young age, perhaps younger than they have any kind of sexual identity. Therefore their whole concept of “them” may be as much Catholic as it is gay.

Okay. Most of your comment seemed to be focused on whether they resemble actual humans. I don’t think we have any information about whether these impact your mental health but I would tend to agree they can’t be good.

Perhaps the point is to seek something that’s not like real humans.

Then you’ll be grateful to be informed you left off your final period.

Someday soon, and it isn’t as far off as some people think: the government will know who we are.

“The salad is screaming” has been a notion for decades.

Also, the Jains have entered the chat.

In the long run, deep-pocketed companies will not have any distinct advantage on developing core models, but they will always have an advantage on computing infrastructure (both for training and servicing queries) and access to content (either by owning major content sources like social media properties or having exclusive license access to key sources).

I know what open source means.

A group that wants to host that game server is eventually going to need to fix it, or adapt it to new software / hardware if we expect it to be able to run in perpetuity. They will need to be able to modify that source code to do so.

So the game publisher can’t just publish one final compiled package “for people to use.” The software has to be able to be maintained, not just used. And if we expect the software to survive over time, it will need a community not just one group. Open source is the only thing that would allow the game publisher to walk away from it, but allow the software to live on.

It’s absolutely true that we have too much focus on pharmaceutical solutions and not enough on general wellness and prevention. But wellness and prevention means exercise and vegetables, not protein bars and woo woo shit about balancing your internal landscape.

Fuck this grotesque man.

But then how could anyone use it? If it’s to download and run at home, you can get away with it. But in many of these cases they’re saying open source it so volunteer group XYZ can host a server and keep the game alive. Wouldn’t group XYZ be vulnerable to copyright action?

I have a feeling this case is the bare tip of the iceberg when it comes to supply neglect.

Supply logistics are every bit as important and challenging as combat tactics when it comes to winning a war.

Yeah I think there’s some promise in “open the source” as a remedy here. Because that doesn’t really put any onus on the game maker. They can keep making games exactly as they do now, but if they want to utterly walk away from a title, they have to open the source.

I think the complications with this would come from IP and copyright law, licensing, etc. for example, if the developer licensed any other software (or music or whatever) in order to make the game, do they actually have the rights to open source all of that? Perhaps not.

It’s kind of like accelerating the public domain thing. Very interesting remedy for this situation, but extremely complex legally, I would guess.