Probably because thentisk of cognitive ability decline over a 4 year period increases significantly. Even if either were at their peak now, there is a higher risk of cognitive decline. Biden already shows signs of decline, so will likely worsen significantly. Trump likely has severe mental health issues and was never in peak health since entering politics.

Pressure should be placed in Biden to stand down. Trump too, but he won’t respond to calls to do the right thing. Biden might. Biden whole reason to stand was to not have Trump. Well, he’s causing it to be more likely Trump. He should state that both of them are too old and mental faculties are not there and stand down.

If he does not, everyone we sensible should still vote Biden in. Trump is dangerous and unhinged.

He can’t keepnwjatbhe doesn’t have.

I dont think so. Its in the EU interest for them to come back in. It will show others that leaving is not a good idea. However, they wkbt want it to be easy as it might encourage others to leave. They will join in the same terms as new entrants.

They will have to join the euro and they wont get their previous favourabke rebate for agriculture.

Its still a good deal for both sides but Britain make a mistake, as most are aware.

While I agree with your point, political motivation is prosecution is a bad thing. Look at the way the hunter Biden story is paraded around as if Joe biden did something wrong. Selectively prosecuting people for political reasons is a hallmark of fascism. So, it does matter, but just not in this case.

Lol, if you mean facebooks AI will skew more towards the views of American Facebook users, I’d say that’s a win for Europe. It will make the AI less valuable, creating a gap in the market for a better AI that can reflect European values or american or both.

AI does not need infinite data. They can easily licence that amount of content. They are just trying to do it cheaply with user content.

I gully expect use for AI training to become a standardized part of locencing for media and content going forwards. For a band or singer, or author, it may be they ibky get a small amoint for using their content but it won’t be stolen. There is minimal value in any one part of the content. There is value in the aggregate of lots of data.

Digitized books out of copyright have more archaic language but I expect we will see lots of media out of copyright being used also. Media organization that make movies, TV shows and publish newspapers and magazines also have a trove of content.

People are awful. God had no part in this. If god did, then he’s a cruel god. If he didn’t, then where is his omnipotence? If its about free will, where is the child’s free will?

What god invents childhood leukemias? What plan could require them and if god was all powerful, could they not make a plan that doesn’t harm innocents.

Also the rise of containerised software that is more easily cross platform for self hosting what would once have been cloud only.

Depending on private companies for free speech is bad for free speech in and of itself. So either course has negatives, which means the course with leqsr negative outcomes is best. If they over moderate, they lose users. If they undermoderate they face fines. I’m sure the market force will mean they do whatever is most profitable.

Holding social media companies responsible for the content they host is a better solution in my view. We hold newspapers responsible. Why not social media? Yes, moderation is expensive but they are wildly profitable, musk aside.

They don’t need to moderate everything, as the content volume is high, but they certainly could manually moderate all content that reaches a certain threshd. They choose not to and hide behind their users sharing as a reason.

I agree, but I think it is more complex than that. There are limits to free speech already. I agree that no one country should be able to censor others, but what about content that is illegally produced in that country.

So if terrorist training videos were made in Australia, could banning them from distribution mean they could prosecute fitter for distributing them? How about csam? How about China prosecutes for ibfro about Tiananmen. What about CSAM?

So objectively there are things some countries would want banned, but not all. Some that all might agree to ban. Classifying it might help but might that be more of an invasion of privacy? The web is built on lots of open protocols that assume good actors and no malicious intent. We are now adding protocols that increase privacy and security on top. Even something like the fediverse is a good example of the trade off between being public and being anonymous and being private. You can’t have it all.

Broken clock.

I remember sega also did a combined pc with amstrad, likely for the uk market in a similar vein to this.

For jurors, seeing the defendant and witnesses live in person is part of the process. They assess body language as well as other things. Video link is helpful as a back up in certaain cases, eg for kids or victims of sexual assault who may be uncomfortable being in the room with their alleged attacker.

Isn’t it wild that it’s even considered dangerous to be a juror for an ex president. Yet some of his non violent followers still dont appreciate how damaging he is for democracy.

Its already too late for them. The idea would be to scare future jurors. Its not like hell only face one jury.

Anyone calling for doxxing should be tracked down and arrested like the terrorist they are.

Lol, tech competency was not his strong point. That’s for Barron. He’s good with the cyber.

He’s probably more upset at losing money from rubes than the guilty verdict.

Yes, but even having multiple options for exchanges, even if centralised means less control by government or others.

They are only a real alternative is when we can use cryoto for cheap real time payments for general items like a credit card.

Yes, but also allows others to have less control over your transactions. I don’t have any crypto as I think its justbanpyramid scheme at the moment, but the concept is sound. The criminals and negative elements is by necessity for them.

Its positive that their position is becoming increasingly difficult to be supportiv of genocide. It creates increasing pressure to alter course. The article rightly calls out their double speak and lack of morals or ethics.

There are local election candidates who have manages tonnecer post Nazi propaganda despite less staff and less financial backing. At a certain point it’s not just incompetence. Its willful. That point was passed during his term, not recently.

Its just a shame that so many can be willfully ignorant or brush it off as you are. It should be consequential. Its like social media companies saying they don’t have the funds to properly moderate with staff. Yet newspapers managed for generations. They seem to always have enough staff to take advertising money.

In this case its not turning a blind eye. Its magnifying damaging voices.

Do they mean x, formerly known as Twitter? This is the first time I’ve seen it reference like this and it’s confusing as a headline, as X can also stand in as an unknown variable.