You’re right, I’ve never voted blue, BECAUSE I DON’T LIVE IN THE US.

But no, I do think that not voting for Kamala was a mistake. Just, you know, not a mistake Biden made or was responsible for, given he only has one vote.

Thrussy? Put in.

I thought we had the communal wank for that?

There’s one upside to this:

From a legal standpoint, if regular people can be de-legalised, so can be billionaires.

Anyone who amasses more than 1bn should have their citizenship revoked, assets and properties confiscated, and dropped onto an all inclusive resort island where all their needs are met, for life. Put 1% of their wealth aside in a fund, the interest on that fund would easily cover all operations regarding the island, the rest, use it to support those most in need.

Well, that’s kind of the problem of a fully open OS where the system administrator (root) can fine-tune everything.

The (technical) purpose of DRM is to ensure the stream goes through a certified channel. This means encryption on the wire, as well as ensuring that the image data, from the point of decryption to the point of display, isn’t intercepted.

For this, the DRM module needs absolute, un-overridable control over the process. With root access, one can easily load a modified GPU driver that funnels the decoded image data not just to the output display, but to a separate buffer (a file). Or not even go that far but simply snatch the encryption key from memory and decrypt the streamed media directly. The list goes on.

"manly alpha male"s apparently smell like a mixture of cheap cologne, stale ketchup and a pair of freshly full Depends.

Yep.

I can see his reasoning, wanting to reduce polarisation in the nation.

But one thing we’ve learned from WW2 is that Nazis cannot be appeased. They cannot be depolarised because their existence hinges on a polarised people, to be able to create new enemies. Because at the end of the day, Nazis aren’t FOR anything. Their current argument might be cloaked in them being for national security, for better life (for a select few), and so on; but in reality, they’re defined by what they’re against.

People coming together and debating policy, coming to a compromise, finding a solution that benefits everyone, is antithetical to fascism.

I’d rather not if you don’t mind

It’s quite simple - by allowing this type of genAI to take hold and have no guardrails, any and all future allegations against the Epstein class can be dismissed with a “fake news, that’s AI” claim.

And since AI is getting better and better at generating images while getting worse and worse at recognising AI generated content…

Biden’s first and foremost fault was not throwing the book at the J6er cunts and the orange instigator cunt in chief.

See, this is what happens when you try to appease domestic terrorists.

$10 says it’s a “repurposed” sex hot and it would’ve taken a whopping week for a more techy student to hack it and say profanities or something similar…

Bro she got that dawg in her

I think this topic is actually ripe for debate.

On one hand we know that Majel specifically recorded phonemes so her voice can be used for Star Trek purposes after her passing. While not a direct consent of “do whatever you want with my voice”, the intent of similar purposes as OP’s has been clearly present.

There’s also Paramount’s refusal to use her voice in new Trek, aside from a few snippets here and there (mostly Picard for the throwback value). Which kinda goes against the spirit of Trek.

On the other hand, the entire area of voice cloning is gray as fuck. It can very easily be used for nefarious purposes, yes - let that be corporate greed or fraud or propaganda. But if I make my own voice system, do I really hurt anyone by using their voice? I am not profiting off of it, I am not sharing the end result, it lives on my computer and that’s it.

But, let’s say I want to do the same. There’s this TV show from some 20 years ago called Eureka. In it is one of the earliest representations of a smart house with an AI governor, called SARAH. SARAH is voiced by one of the recurring cast members, in fact it’s an ongoing joke that the house is voiced by this guy “talking like a girl”, and that he’s trying to get Sarah Michelle Gellar to do the proper, final voice…

Now, the voice itself is pretty unique, but it isn’t the voice of the actor, it’s been heavily digitally edited. It’s also a pretty unique voice but not something 99.9% of people would recognise. I make my clone from my own BR disk collection, with a set of automated and AI tools to get the right audio, clean it up, split by talker, and process all 77 episodes, manually selecting the right samples, manually tagging and labelling each; and finally, fine-tuning my own model for my own use. It will never leave my home, I won’t sell or share it, and technically, with me owning the BR collection, this would fall under fair use.

Which is still quite different than, say, a corporate entity trying to sell more product by using your voice.

deleted by creator

Tomatoes are fruit tho. Peppers too, and thus so is paprika, technically.

As LycanGalen says, it’s kind of pee, in the sense that it comes from the bladder and goes out the peehole.

But pee is strictly speaking waste filtered by the kidneys, with enough urea, ammonia and other stuff in it. And pretty much every single scientifically done testing showed trace amounts of it in squirt.

Think of it like this: you have a “well seasoned” tea mug, with thick, solidified tea residue on its walls, so solid it barely comes off even if you scrape it. You take this cup, fill it with water. Is that water now tea just because it has some marginal tea residue in it?

Cheesus

Worry not, even though possession of CSAM should be a permanent bar; I’m sure Trump’s lawyers are already writing up something to get the Tate bros citizenship!

I’d say half.

The other half is truly so clueless that they think “both sides are the same and we need to find the middle ground”. Which in itself is a major bastardisation of the doctrine of compromise (which says that in a sane system, often the best solution is a compromise between differing parties).

However that doctrine cannot apply to debates about human rights, as one cannot compromise on those.

Centrists ARE usually clueless enough to blend things together as such…