rekabis

culminating in 2005, when then president George W Bush signed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which attempts to insulate the gun industry from civil liability after their products are used in shootings.

Trust Republicans to fuck over the little guy in favour of protecting their Parasite-Class buddies and the revenue streams that keep them obscenely wealthy.

I would hardly consider that pricing insane. Consumer TVs are massively subsidized by the smart tech built into them, in some cases by up to 60%. Plus, they are often fragile with cheaper components because they are expected to be mounted in “safe” places away from unusual conditions or extreme temperatures.

Considering the more robust construction (for commercial use) and lack of subsidization, I would consider those prices to be spot-on and rather reasonable.

Plenty of companies make display TVs that only display commercial content. You see them all the time displaying menus in fast food restaurants.

These can also have all smart tech turned off because some companies also use them as digital whiteboards to display proprietary or confidential information.

Oh, FFS. It’s supposed to be a Daemon, not a penguin!!

This saved the taxpayer a lot of money.

And predictions mean absolutely nothing until the evidence is in.

Problem is, people frequently celebrate predictions, and build policy with those predictions. That’s called jumping the gun.

Until that graph curves over, it isn’t true.

Evidence trumps wishes and fantasies and wild guesses. I refuse to get ensnared by hopium, especially when the hard evidence isn’t even in yet.

Until that graph curves over, it isn’t true.

Evidence trumps wishes and fantasies. I refuse to get ensnared by hopium.

The execution of a man later found to have been innocent should automatically generate a murder conviction for all the key players (those who could have done something) in the chain that put him to death.

So that would be the key witness at the trial, the prosecutors at that trial, the judges on the state Supreme Court, and the governor that refused to grant clemency.

The system needs to be held responsible when it knowingly makes mistakes and intentionally fails to correct those mistakes.

And once emissions begin showing a downward-facing curve, indicating decreasing emissions, I will begin to be hopeful.

But when emissions are still curving strongly upward, with no hint of even a straight trend line (indicating that emissions growth has halted), I continue to be brutally and hyper-realistically pessimistic.

and it too has been accelerating so it doesn't change the point its just there are some prior emission impacts

Say you don’t understand emissions measuring without actually saying you don’t understand emissions measuring.

Past emissions only place emissions up to a value. Current emissions are what determine whether our emissions output is continuing to accelerate, or are actually slowing down.

And yesterday’s emissions continue to be smaller than today’s emissions. That is why it’s called accelerating emissions.

But AI does still produce something

I don’t think that wild, uncontrollable hallucinations counts as “productive output”.

Output, yes, but not productive output.