This gets at my own personal perspective of using LLMs to respond - it’s not just about not putting effort into understanding and responding yourself, rather it is about making yourself a proxy to a tool I could use myself, and doing so *without even having a better understanding of how to use the tool to answer my question*, and still thinking you’re somehow made a positive contribution, that is the most disrespectful.

If you genuinely thought the LLM could help me then you should be explaining your process to me for how to use it and validate responses, or else at least you should ask me for more info and explain how you think it’s responses could help if you really do think you’re better at operating it.

Imagine doing the same in a workshop, and taking a powertool to an object before you even bothered figuring out what the other person wanted. Or trying to be helpful by asking questions on your behalf to other departments, but messing up the context and thus repeatedly producing useless answers that you have to put time into refuting.

What do you mean, he played the genie, and, oh right…

Nobody removed your choice to change servers

It’s literally part of the point of the fediverse that you can pick hosts who agree with you, who can apply moderation and bans you agree with on your behalf, and if you disagree you move and bring people with you if you can convince them

You washed your dishes too hard

In /dev/null

Who can even afford memory at this point

We Swedes can get in on the verylongcompoundword fun too

Yes, this. Tax collateral as advance on capital gains and the whole incentive to dodge taxes with loans go away and it remains fair too

You could make exceptions for loans taken to improve the same asset (home improvement loans) but you’d have to pass strict audits to get the exception approved

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/what-the-supreme-court-got-wrong-in-the-trump-section-3-case

SCOTUS didn’t even rule on if he’s disqualified.

https://reason.com/volokh/2025/05/20/judge-rules-removal-of-u-s-institute-of-peace-usip-directors-was-illegal/

It’s not the same type of case, but it’s relevant to show total legal nullification and total reversal is legally supported. It can be extended to the entire second term, erasing every change he made.

[T]he purported removal of Ambassador George Moose as acting president of the Institute by a resolution adopted by less than a majority of the duly appointed Board of Directors of USIP was invalid, and therefore null, void, and without legal effect ….

Enforce 14A3 and declare the second term invalid and null and void. That will nullify all the pardons too

Cats are liquid

Inflammatory factors are linked to autism (seems like a lot of things which can cause immune dysregulation are). Smoke is inflammatory.

You’re forgetting the girl gets to also make a wish

Not quite how copyright law works. Photoshop and similar gives you copyright because it captures your expression.

An LLM is more like work-for-hire but unlike a human artist it doesn’t qualify for copyright protection and therefore neither does you

https://infosec.pub/comment/20390963

There’s already rulings on this holding that the prompt for all LLM or image generator isn’t enough to count the result as the human’s expression, thus no copyright (both in USA and other places)

You need both human expression and creative height to get copyright protection

Not how copyright works. Adding something with creative height together with something without leaves the combined work with ownership only of the part with creative height with the rest unprotected.

(bots can not achieve creative height by definition in law)

Yes.

Meanwhile intelligence agencies says they want to stop encryption to help them investigate crime…

Lobbyists selected by rich people tell politicians who to appoint to lead agencies. These people give directives and can get agents fired for disobeying.

Stopping it means removing “single points of failures” like not having such a powerful hierarchy, in addition to accountability measures (independent inspections, etc)

Pressure wash

Well, unless they also made key generation shitty, because that’s equally plausible and would likely allow RSA keys to be broken (it’s surprisingly hard to generate RSA keys safely)