Populism is when unpopular and serving only the elite? Nah, I’m pretty sure you’ve got that exactly backwards.

The scum pushing chat control are in no way “populists.” No actual people want it!

Wololo

…wait, wrong game.

Here’s a better idea: let’s destroy the parking lots, build buildings that are actually useful in their place, and then put the solar panels on top of that.

Or if you must insist on having big-box stores with lots of parking, at the very least put it under the store!

Wait a second, this implies that mice are predators.

I remember hearing about that. Do we know if the second bank has also lost a lawsuit yet?

Which is all the more reason law enforcement should not have cared.

The grandchildren/furries were also studying mathmatics (computer science/engineering). Just sayin’.

I don’t think I’ve so much as touched my PinePhone in years. I should charge it up and try loading some new software builds on it.

That customer knew exactly what they wanted.

They’ll get there. They hate the idea of individual people being able to make things for themselves or having any other escape from consumer serfdom.

It’s not even just surveillance! It is destruction of property rights generally, including the right to repair and the ability for individuals to own their means of production.

The law. It would become a criminal offense to use open source firmware.

And that’s exactly what the tech oligarchs’ true goal is.

This goes way, way beyond ‘guns.’ It is an assault on property rights and freedom of expression as concepts generally. It would fully outlaw Free Software firmware (which is what the entire 3D printer hobby, having started with the RepRap project, is based on!). It would cut the Maker movement as a whole off at the knees.

It’s absolute tyranny in ways entirely unrelated to guns themselves.

Are we going to start fitting [CNC lathes and mills] with “you might be making a gun” detectors, too? Of course not.

I’ve got some bad news for you about just how fucked-up these proposed laws actually are.

(That’s from the Timberborn intro cutscene, if anybody’s curious.)

“Collage-age” is anything from toddler on up (basically, anybody with enough dexterity to glue macaroni to construction paper).

College-age, which is what I meant before I made that embarrassing typo 🤦, is generally 18 and up except for people in joint enrollment or who graduated high school early (which I would say implies that they’re high-achieving enough that their literacy shouldn’t be in question).

How is it “a stretch by any measure” to say that people who are at least 18 now, and who therefore were at least 15 when ChatGPT came out three years ago, should’ve already had a better than 10-year-old reading level by that age and would therefore have had to have regressed in order to have a 10-year-old reading level now?

Are you suggesting that collage-age people who had better than 10-year-old-level reading skills a few years ago before ChatGPT existed have since regressed?

“having the gf” implies the “wlw.”

Only if you already knew (or assumed) that the person who posted it was female. I, for one, didn’t pay attention to the username or avatar pic, so for me, it was a helpful clarification.

“Lesbian” is a statement of identity, while “WLW” is merely a description of behavior.

As I understand it, terms like “WLW” are preferred by sex researchers in order to keep the focus of the research on the behavior and try to prevent it from being used to categorize people too much.