claimed an objective opinion, and that supposed to have data and a study to back it

Not “someone”. Me. And I linked to the paper, which itself had many links to other studies backing up my claim. You essentially said “nuh uh, more sources” without providing any of your own. Your bad faith arguments don’t work here, go back to Xitter.

so let’s get the data and compare

Yes, let’s get the data. You first. You’re really good at telling other people to go get data and sources. Show us how it’s done.

My brother in christ, drones are all over that paper. Have you read an academic paper before? Do you know how to follow sources in papers? Tell you what, you go find some sources of your own and we can compare. Sitting back and saying “nuh uh” ain’t gonna do it. Put up or shut up.

Yes, I do. Here you go champ.

Objectively yes.

That’s the joke. Nearly every proposed implementation of AI isn’t actually solving a real business or tech problem. It’s just the next snake oil, like block chain, quantum computing, etc. There are real, valid use cases for all of those things. But most companies have no idea what they really are, how they might help, and even if they could help, what it would take to implement to see real results.

It’s not just the lead you’d have to worry about. Commercial jets spew all kinds of nasty shit, and there’s also the significant amount of particulates in the air from the tires. It’s just not safe nor healthy to live that close to an airport, lead or no lead.

Also, I would absolutely not eat the produce from those farms, which according to TFA, they’re still producing and selling locally.

It reminds me of how tech companies are all scrambling to use AI. There was a funny article recently where the author pointed out that these companies are struggling to do very basic things, so the idea that they could somehow tackle AI in a way that’s useful and profitable is silly.

Here’s the article, very entertaining and worth the read.

It’s crazy when you think about it. They picked up their lives, sold their homes in southern california, and moved to fucking central florida of all places. It’s such a massive, massive downgrade in every conceivable category to move from socal to central florida. Then to have the company that mandated this (probably under threat of termination) pull a bait-and-switch once the employees and their families had moved, I’d be lawyering up and suing too. I’d sue them to make me whole – put me back in the same neighborhood I left, in a same or better house (with the same or better loan amount and terms), and offset any losses (with interest) related to moving, my spouse’s loss of job and income, provide equivalent income and job placement for my spouse until they find an equal or better job, and guarantee my employment at current job and comp for the next 10 years (with a sparkling golden parachute if they terminate me earlier).

Get a pellet gun and shoot them down. You’ll find out quickly who is doing it when they trespass on your property to retrieve their downed hardware.

There is no hate like Christian love.

• Spirit
• Frontier
• Allegiant
• JetBlue
• Breeze

This sounds like the setting for a Guy Ritchie film.

This is what I don’t get. Just don’t use social media on your phone. I don’t have Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, etc. on my phone. But the camera, maps, music and audiobooks, email, calendar, digital wallet, etc. are invaluable to me. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.

Encouraging cleanliness is not the point at all. The point is: "… policing methods that target minor crimes, such as vandalism, loitering, public drinking and fare evasion, help to create an atmosphere of order and lawfulness. " Source.

In the specific case that OP is referring to with Giuliani and NYC: “Bratton directed the police to more strictly enforce laws against subway fare evasion, public drinking, public urination, and graffiti.”

That’s literally what it would have done. “Second Civil War” would be a response to the overthrowing of democracy. If they took the VP and held a gun to the rest of congress to keep Trump in power, then democracy is over at that point. The ensuing civil war would be a fight to restore it.

Just imagine the average reddit, twitter, facebook, and instagram content. Then realize that half of that content is dumber than that. That’s half of what these AI models use to learn. The “smarter” half is probably filled with sarcasm, inside jokes, and other types of innuendo that the AI at this stage has no chance of understanding correctly.

They came really, really close. Completely failed would have looked much different; e.g. not making it up the steps of the building. In reality, they were this close to taking the VP, and one door away from members of Congress hiding under desks.

Have you watched any of the presidential debates in the last decade or two? How is this even a question at this point?

I won’t watch any more debates until they do this.

Nice. A completely toothless group of people performing a pointless and inconsequential exercise to determine whether someone everyone knows is unethical is, in fact, also unethical for doing this other thing.