Mainly birds of prey I imagine.

I mean people who identify as agnostic generally choose to do so specifically because they don’t see themselves as atheist. I’m agnostic myself and I definitely don’t consider myself to be atheistic any more than I consider myself to be religious.

I think “good person” is a nebulous and generally subjective term. If some people need an external factor to hold themselves accountable then as long as they willingly seek out that accountability then that’s all that matters to me ultimately, I’m not going to try and micromanage how other people reconcile with their own morality in a large uncaring universe, or act like I’m an authority on how people are supposed to be “good”, all I care about is how they treat other people at the end of the day. But a lot people use religion not as a way to hold themselves personally accountable for their actions, but rather as an excuse to get away with doing bad things and dictating how other people can live their lives without having to suffer consequences. They use it to ESCAPE accountability, and that’s when I take issue with it.

We need change period, we can’t afford to be picky about what kind.

Uteran immigrant.

You would think that conservatives would realize that this is a boulder that they can’t keep trying to roll uphill forever, but I suppose they’re not exactly known for their forward thinking.

That depends on the culture and the method of distribution, many cultures that practice oral history did have widespread interest and access to it and an understanding of how their culture fit into the broader scope of the world to some degree, though the way they understood or related to it might differ from culture to culture (some cultures tie their history to places, or names, or events, or people or seasons, etc). As another example, the Romans are well known for their prolific historiography and many of their surviving texts are still referenced to this day. Look up Pliny the Elder and Pliny the Younger, who were just as well known and respected as historians at the time as they are now. While written works such as the Encyclopedia Natural History (written by Pliny the Elder and believed to be the first encyclopedia) would often be released to the public to be copied and spread, they would also often recite written works orally so illiteracy wasn’t as much of a barrier as you’d think. Oral history is a lot more important in providing a record of a culture’s history as well as making that history accessible to others than a lot of people think. It was important in ancient Greece as well, and is a huge part of many other cultures around the world including many indigenous ones. It’s also not as inaccurate or unreliable as some people might think, as there were many methods these cultures used and still use to preserve the accuracy of their oral history as it was passed down from generation to generation.

Now in terms of awareness, obviously there was propaganda and rewritten history going on back then just as there is now, but it’s not as if none of the citizens would have been aware of that. One of the papers I wrote for a class about the importance of comparing primary sources featured 3 different accounts of what Athens was like and the views people there held at a certain point in history from 3 different people of varying social and financial status, and there was absolutely awareness of that sort of dissonance between what their government claimed and what the reality was even among the more common folk. So I would say they did certainly have a significant understanding of how their culture fit into the broader scope of human history.

At this point that’s the equivalent of complaining about people calling gun violence a problem because “guns don’t kill people, people kill people”. If you hand the public easy access to a dangerous tool then of course they’re going to use it to do dangerous things. It’s important to recognize the inherent danger of said tool.

As someone with an academic background in history, historical record keeping both written and oral existed long before the printing press.

You also needed an original to make the fake with Photoshop, with AI you don’t need that so there are no receipts, so to speak, to pull to prove that it’s fake.

The punch line is that “son” and “sun” sound the same. “my kid” isn’t a reuse of the punchline any more than “my boy” is, but it reads less awkwardly.

“my kid” is more natural sounding and indicates parenthood a bit more obviously.

The person you replied to WAS talking about Palestinians so at least have the integrity of taking responsibility for your own response which by nature calls Palestinians terrorists.

Israel isn’t just killing Hamas. They’re killing civilians. They’re not taking any appropriate steps to avoid killing civilians. Israel has all the power in this situation, including the power to avoid as much collateral damage as possible, but they don’t care about collateral damage, they only care about giving collective punishment.

The fact that it’s part of the Trump administration playbook indicates that perhaps it is not a great way to run a country and isn’t something that should be emulated.

I’m no expert but it seems to me like it’s basically the kind of thing that is only technically legal only because nobody has been stupid enough to push their luck. If someone did try to do this they’d likely still be challenged legally in order to set a precedent, so I’m guessing it’s not like Biden could do something like this and get away with it scott free.

Fucking idiots, trying to act like the chatbot wasn’t their responsibility.

Why the fuck would they even be thinking of letting AI make these decisions?

Probably not but that doesn’t mean we need even more dangerous and deadly sports to add to the pile.

You may need to consult a doctor.