See your brain went immediately to a solution based on knowing how something works. That’s not in the AI wheelhouse.

He can definitely be the face of the right. Let Asmongold be what people think of when someone airs those kinds of opinions.

In 1861 Russia abolished serfdom.

In 1961 Gagarin reached space.

It’s just barely implausible a person born a serf could have seen their descendant explore space.

I never got a campaign off the ground, but Palladium had, I thought, a great system.

I loved the approach to alignment (good, selfish, evil) and awarding xp for roleplaying, clever ideas, and problem solving, rather than simply killing an enemy.

Obligatory response to this meme e’er time, “Sigh, if it’s on septic its massively expensive infrastructure the tenant will be held liable for 10/10 times, and will only render one less living space habitable. And if it’s on sewer it’s punishing the public’s wastewater treatment facility.”

Aand resume.

Protip: in small talk/office chitchat C is often functionally D.

‘Do the thing’ is using the tools a user has at their disposal to block other users. Communities can block and ban users too.

Defederation over moderation is not the thing I am suggesting. Especially not as part of a multiyear campaign perpetuating a bad-faith feedback loop.

That’s why instances, communities, and users can be blocked and banned. If ‘their conversation’ is not allowed in ‘your space’ then do the thing and move on.

To me there’s a difference between using assets that were generated by AI and a game using generative AI to create assets.

A person hired as an artist to make dialogue portraits could have shoveled some slop to meet a deadline. That’s a production issue.

But if the games are being integrated with a generative AI model to cover minor assets, that’s a fundamental development issue and I can cannot possibly see how that’s good for anything.

They don’t so much ‘change sex’ as they grow reproductive organs in response to conditions and blast sperm and/or eggs everywhere, sometimes both at the same time.

I get what you mean, and it’s a common thought and strategy. It just doesn’t work as well as one might think. Unless there is a union, employees are at a significant disadvantage. Forming a union would be FAR more effective than quoting OSHA regs.

The main thing is regulatory violations aren’t (usually) criminal so there’s a long administrative process to most enforcement actions. Companies overwhelmingly have the resources to litigate beyond their employees means. So if they have the resources to have legal council or a compliance officer, there likely needs to be a well documented paper trail of concealment or otherwise flagrant disregard or denial of improved conditions.

There not being A/C isn’t enough. Refusing requests to install A/C is better. The company removing workers fans to make a point goes further in a case. Then putting out an internal memo requiring zero ventilation and to lie to investigators is a strong case.

The fear of god isn’t enforceable. The main thing you do in referencing OSHA is to demonstrate a level of knowledge, commitment, or at least interest in the issue. And most of the time it is the appearance of concealing a condition that is the enforced violation. This is usually what companies are actually sensitive to.

So while an OSHA violation is a serious thing, the conditions in question here (heat) are not a regulation that can be violated and therefore enforced in the same way.

Yep, and precisely why there is the need to develop an argument in defining ‘reasonable’ instead of just citing the applicable law or regulation. The OSHA recommendation provides a less arbitrary foundation for defining a reasonable temperature.

The OSHA recommendation is 68-76F, which isn’t a direct link to ‘reasonable’ but provides a suitable context to frame workplace conditions.

If people’s body temperatures can be measured exceeding 100F a link to heat stress and increasing risk of injury in the workplace can also be drawn as it’s generally the equivalent of working with a fever.

The SPD used people like Erich Ludendorff to eliminate Communists. The SPD directly inherited the government from the Prussian King, maintained the interests of the German Empire, and killed Communist political leaders prior to the first election of the Weimar Republic.

The SPD government was the power structure that directly empowered, then acquiesced to multiple coup attempts by the monarchist anti-democratic right wing.

Now, the Russian Social Democrat Party, on the other hand, won their war. So it’s not necessarily the ‘Social Democrat’ part so much as the ‘Maintaining Imperial Power Structures’ part that the German SPD is faulted for.

The KPD also went on to try and do coalition with the Nazi right wing too, with likewise predictably terrible results.

I really hate that this is some of the toughest public language I have seen about Israel from an American official.

Absolute parody.

‘HOA Board member’ puts this entire thread of conversation into perfect context.

Without it the value of the Suez Canal plummets. Please, think of the shareholders.