Generative LLM’s are garbage

And they hallucinate uncontrollably. You literally cannot trust their output.

For sure, that is also one hell of a run-on sentence in that main block of text. Dude could do with some proper punctuation.

The lack of an apostrophe for “Can see you’re logged in” is unreasonably irritating to this grammatical pedant.

Most of America (all but 7 states) and all of Canada are one-party jurisdictions. That means you can record conversations without anyone else knowing so long as you are a primary participant in said conversation.

If you have an iPhone (which prevents calls from being recorded as a security feature), it helps to invest in a small digital recorder and to take all calls on speakerphone.

If you take communications through apps like Teams or Slack, there are third-party apps that can screen record your entire monitor such that the other person won’t be informed of the recording. Recording through teams, for example, would have Teams tell the other person that the screen is being recorded.

Don’t just record convos that you think might be important. Record all calls just in case someone does something particularly in your favour, such as asking an illegal question.

I once interviewed for a job, was accepted, then showed up on my first day only to find out that the position had been given to someone else.

And with written proof of acceptance, any employment lawyer worth their degree could have gotten you a healthy amount of compensation even after their cut. Behaviour like this by any company is illegal in almost all jurisdictions, and should never be tolerated.

Great summary.

Legally they cannot.

gender supremacists:

“Hold my beer and watch me do exactly that. Again and again and again without any censure or pushback, purely because I am being a gender bigot against men, and for no other reason. We have full societal and legal ability to employ open misandry, because opposition of any kind is misogyny by default.”

domestic violence happens to men too.

71% of non-reciprocal (only one person being abusive) physically violent (actually striking) domestic violence involves women striking men.

As in, 71% of those victims are men.

And under those same conditions (non-reciprocal physically violent DV), two-thirds of victims that were injured seriously enough to require hospitalization were men, yet almost 100% were also arrested as the “perps”, even though they were the only victims.

Losts of people have problems with these facts. Wild how bad anti-reality ideological indoctrination has gotten.

There are fake job postings.

IIRC, there was one very recent (mid-2024) study of job ads that strongly suggested that 60-75% of them were never meant to be filled. As in, the company posted them for entirely unrelated reasons.

It’s why these are called “ghost jobs”: they don’t exist.

I wasn’t talking about pedal confusion

Then why respond to my comment? Because pedal confusion was 100% of the subject under consideration. All you did was add noise to the signal by bringing in something entirely unrelated to what I was talking about.

Pedal confusion has to do with the person, not the size of vehicle that they drive.

IMO, any confirmed case of “pedal confusion” in a driver should be followed by an irrevocable loss of the driver’s license for life, and a ban on driving anywhere, anywhen.

I would even gladly see an international registry to prevent people like these from moving to other countries and getting driver’s licenses there.

If you cannot tell which pedal is which, and maintain 100% control over which is getting pressed, you are a lethal threat to everyone around you. You cannot be allowed to drive, full stop end of story. There is no reality in which you could ever be “safe” behind the wheel.

And we have similar limitations for other people: those subject to medication-resistent grand mal seizures also cannot drive for much the same reasons, in that there is no way to prevent them from being a lethal threat once operating a vehicle.

If someone owns a billion dollar company (based on the price of their shares of stock) we call them a billionaire but they might not have very much money in cash (say a few million).

And yet…

The moment shares are used as a source of value to leverage, they should be taxed on that assessed value. Because this is also how so many of the wealthy can get away with “$0 income” - they are “paid” in shares, then turn around and use those shares to get loans from the bank to pay their living expenses. They essentially leverage shares for tax-free income.

If any and all leverage on shares are taxed on that assessed leverage, the Parasite Class would no longer have any way to shield their obscene wealth from taxation.

You don’t agree that seniors who get no visits from their lousy kids could use the interaction a lot more?

Your logical fallacy is: False Dilemma.

Point very well made.

These days, many conservatives seem to have taken a break from reality, preferring to focus on ideologies and ideas that have no connection to the real world.

Even many of the things they accuse progressives of, we’re just standing there with confusion and befuddlement going, “that’s nowhere near an accurate characterization of this thing. What TF are you smoking?”

Like that one bit in the comment that lashed out against cross dressers - WTF??

I can still see that comment in my inbox, and even if you remove the racist aspect, it is still deeply problematic from any position that faces a “facts and science” direction.

Because even if we ignore the fact that we have blown 4× past our planet’s safe and healthy carrying capacity that still allows maximum health and resiliency in ecosystems (as in, let’s ignore the fact that the planet could benefit immediately and immensely by losing 3 out of every 4 humans), there is then the question of why people aren’t having children… and again, it comes right back down to conservative policies of eliminating social safety nets, taking the burden of taxation away from the Parasite Class to place it onto the working class, and “freeing the market” to capitalist shenanigans that have caused home values and other costs to skyrocket and wages & benefits to erode.

People aren’t having children because it has become fiscally irresponsible to do so. And not just mildly fiscally irresponsible, but prohibitively so. From the 40s to the 80s, a couple needed only a few short years (or none at all, if the man had already established himself in the workplace) to afford starting a family. Homes were well within reach of even minimum wage workers, in that brand new homes in many regions were not that much beyond the other half of the one-third rule of, “a purchased home should not be more than 3× annual wage”. My own detached, single-family, split-level house was built in 1972, when the minimum wage was $2/hr, or $40k/yr. It sold in that year for only $15,900. That’s only 4× more than MINIMUM wage.

Now? In my tiny corner, in a tourist town 3+ hrs from the nearest metro region, median-value homes are 29× that of minimum wage, and 25× of the median income. Remember - median means middle… half of all working-class adults earn more than the median income, half of all working-class adults earn less. There is no way a couple can afford a stable foundation on which to build a family without dedicating several decades to the task before a baby even arrives.

And all this comes from Conservative “let the market decide” policies. I could enumerate all the triggers - such as corporations whose only purpose is to come in, buy up as much of a neighbourhood as possible, then rent the houses back out for as much as the market will bear to maximize their profit margins, thereby denying people an exit and leaving them locked-in as lifetime renters - but that would involve hitting Lemmy’s content limitations several times over.

Seriously? I’m being down voted? Why?

Because you are being a hypocrite, and espousing pretty much the opposite of what conservatism stands for.

Conservatism is all about the upward flow of wealth, from the working class to the parasite class. Why else would conservatives defund social safety nets yet also cut taxes - but only for the wealthy? Even the recent “axe the tax” movement to cut the carbon tax will hurt working-class Canadians, and provide a financial boon to the Parasite Class, who are being hurt the most by the carbon tax.

In no single jurisdiction on the planet are conservatives “for the working class”. They are all about corporate interests; killing off unions to benefit the wealthy and powerful, re-implementing child labour, eliminating safety laws that protect workers, and doing everything to make the rich even richer at the expense of everyone else.

You want to protect working-class Canadians? You want to fight against corporatism? You want a healthy ecosystem for your grandchildren to enjoy? You want a strong social safety net that promotes healthy and strong communities? You want stronger worker protections and healthy wages that let everyone flourish, and not just the Parasite Class?

Vote NDP. Because they are the only party trying to do this.

One of the really popular subs - with hundreds of posts per day - cracked down on bots and nothing was posted for two days afterwards. Can’t recall which sub it was, It was WholesomeMemes. I caught wind of that a few days later and it was truly a ghost town. Even now they’ve only got something like 5% of their pre-bot-ban traffic back - about 4-6 posts a day.

Now let’s see if they have any connection to PeePee’s campaign.

Because of capitalism. Because all content must drive quarterly profit ever-higher.

Meanwhile, public broadcasting (PBS) is still putting out great content for families regardless of profitability.

Jake Sully did this in his Avatar body during the Assault on the Tree of Souls, after Turuk Maktow put him on top of Colonel Quaritch’s Dragon command craft.

And yes: very, very cool.