Just passing through. 🮲🮳
Still a pretty big hurdle for most bots that just aimlessly flow through the webs trying to sign up for things. I don’t think anyone will bother tailoring their bot for europe.pub.
Putting the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy between the question and the answer field might further confuse LLM outputs. :)
Colbert doesn’t want solutions to anything. He wants problems to make fun of.
You do realize the man is a comedian? Making fun of problems is kinda his job description.
The rendering engineer working on Zootopia 2 is on Mastodon, at @yiningkarlli@mastodon.gamedev.place.
It’s a pretty neat follow, and has made me somewhat excited about this movie despite having lukewarm feelings towards Disney (at best). It seems a lot of love is going into it.
Luigi singled out one incredibly evil man and dealt with him. This guy shot one random CEO seemingly by accident, as well as some random people.
Kill five random people in the NYC financial district and chances are at least a couple will be deplorable. That doesn’t make you a vigilante.
Yeah, the media is not suppressing some working class hero story here. It’s just a man who lost his marbles.
At first I only read that it was a building housing finance institutions, so I figured he had probably just snapped and figured he’d attack the world of finance. So crazy, but driven by the state of everything rather than by some random sports career.
I didn’t see that it also housed the NFL. Makes the Football story a lot more plausible. So the CEO might indeed just have been a random bystander like anyone else at the scene.
In either case it’s obviously not a defendable of constructive thing to do, I just speculated that maybe there’s bigger things in America to lose your mind over than football. Maybe I was wrong.
In either case it’s a reflection of the mental health crisis.
He shot a Blackstone CEO, yet when I search for him the media reports on his football career as a potential reason?
What the hell? America is not in a position where the assassination of CEOs needs to be explained. The question is how some of them can still show their faces in public.
Edit: See comments below. I’m dumb and/or jumping to conclusions too quickly.
The worlds smallest violin keeps getting smaller.
"I left this gigantic capitalist American monolith and the alternative I found was full of leftists! "
Well, duh.
(Obligatory fuck tankies.)
Oh yeah, it seems like half the posts I made on reddit in the end were shadow deleted, and I’m not even sure what I did wrong. Just automatic and instant action from Reddit. At least here when your shit is deleted you know about it.
I’m not here to suffer fools.
And bans come cheap because they’re on an instance level. Go out and find yourself a place where you belong. If it turns out the people you’d like to talk to don’t like you back, maybe recalibrate.
The Commission has no law-making power on its own. They can open proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Union to verify compliance with existing laws, or they propose legislation that will have to go through other EU institutions (the Parliament, which is elected, and the Council, which consists of representatives from Member State governments).
The job of the Commission is to propose laws. The job of the other institutions is to reject these laws if they are stupid. The Commission opening an investigation does not mean that the EU is “adopting similar regulations” - it is an extremely long way away from that.
And even the Commission itself is likely to contain a wide spectrum of opinions within it - it tends to be a strange political constellation. So until there’s a Commission proposal (as happened with chat control) there’s really nothing. After the Commission proposal, we need to make sure it’s stopped by pressuring national governments (Council) and elected MEPs (Parliament).
Yeah, there’s no guarantees against stupidity in the member states. That’s easier to reverse than if it happens in an EU regulation.
This kind of misinformation is why people get confused and vote for right wing eurosceptic parties, which ironically tends to be the parties most eager to strip people’s rights away.
What exactly do you think a Commission blueprint is?
It’s nothing but soft power and hardly even that, little more than just thinking out loud. It has no implications whatsoever unless member states decide they want to implement the ideas nationally, in which case it’s on them. The Commission cannot implement EU law unilaterally.
As for chat contol, that’s about banning true encryption. Very different from regulating big tech.
I would like to know which EU law it is they are takling about, aa they proclaim pretty boldly that the Union is adapting “similar Regulations”. I follow EU politics somewhat closely and I have no idea what they are talking about.
The Commission has published some guidelines and recommendations, which are as legally binding as a fart.
As for chat control: With that attitude, probably.
Are you talking about chat control?
It was rejected once, and will be rejected again. At least if people mobilize a bit against it. There’s a long way from Commission proposal to law.
Equating the proposal of a law with the adaptation of it is highly misleading. The EU is a complex institution where different bodies are pulling in different directions.
Yeah, it used to work with the account from the first university, and has probably been disallowed somewhere in the settings as a “safety feature”.
I’m just thankful IT seems to be as fed up with Microsoft as I am, so hopefully some day they’ll make the change to something else.
I think it reveals that the antagonist is more used to hunting humans than animals, and that referring to the target as an “it” takes a bit of getting used to.
For the movie it might help make the stakes seem a bit higher, underlining that this is no ordinary hunt.
But also of course it hints that he know the identity. Especially so maybe when he feels the need to correct himself - the vicar gets the feeling something is off.
I have Microsoft Outlook accounts with two different universities.
Outlook does not work with Thunderbird or any other app besides the official Outlook one, which doesn’t exist for Linux. Even if it did I wouldn’t want to install it. So I am forced to use web mail.
Even though the domain names are different, Outlook freaks the fuck out at the notion that one could be signed in with two different Microsoft accounts in the same web browser. It’s hard to access my inbox for one university without completely signing out of my inbox for the other.
Now I just allocate one university to container A, and the other to container B. It’s just one of the many hoops I have to jump through to make e-mail barely functional in 2025.
<html> <head><title>Website<title></head> <body> <h1>It's 2025, motherfuckers!</h1> <p>Can you believe it</p> </body> </html>You can have this one for free.