thatswrong0

Yeah, the rules have kind of made the passive investment active. I don't understand OPs point at all. I don't understand why we suddenly change the rules and rush things, and OP has provided 0 justification for that.

China buys 80% of Iran's shipped oil. But this affects the prices of pretty much anyone who imports oil - if China can't get oil from Iran, they'll purchase it from someone else. Less supply => higher prices for everyone.

I wish it was more popular - it’s more enjoyable to watch and play since it’s not nearly as much prep / memorization

o/ I'm a silent majority member for sure. I've seen these complaints before and I nod my head every time remembering that "Oh yeah, this DOES suck but I just put up with it because it happens so frequently and there ain't no way I'm switching ecosystems".

Sidenote: please Apple, if I type the same misspelled (but not) thing two times in a row, just leave it be. And no, I did not mean "what the he'll". And why is selecting text so hard.

That’s definitely not suspicious timing

> To estimate injury risk at different impact speeds, IIHS researchers examined 202 crashes involving pedestrians ages 16 or older

A child is probably more likely to die in a collision of the same speed as an adult.

I feel like it’s gotta pretty deep into their mouth. Idk how they’re not gagging

> The art generated is not a 1-1 copy in any way.

Yeah right. AI art models can and have been used to basically copy any artist’s style many ways that make the original actual artist’s hard work and effort in honing their craft irrelevant.

Who profits? Some tech company.

Who loses? The artists who now have to compete with an impossibly cheap copy of their own work.

This is theft at a massive scale. We are forcing countless artists whose work was stolen from them to compete with a model trained on their art without their consent and are paying them NOTHING for it. Just because it is impressive doesn’t make it ok.

Shame on any tech person who is okay with this.

The FCC Chairman threatened ABC over Kimmel's comments. This is not applicable.

> it's nonsensical to believe that someone beloved by most people in the right wing would be targeted by a fellow right-winger

Look up groypers and Nick Fuentes - he's a right winger who was NOT a fan of Charlie Kirk and amassed a following about it. There is _some_ very mild evidence to believe that it's possible (I personally don't think that's the case FWIW)