theunknownmuncher

Including "net" in net positive means that it is more positive than the negatives, so... you're saying that starting an illegal war of choice with no real longterm plan and bombing children and civilians was worth killing the Iranian supreme leader. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it is probably not really what you meant, but it is what the words you typed meant.

Iranian state media told me so.

Software would ask the OS for the age range of the user (under 13, 13-15, 16-17, 18+). The software would implement content filters based on these age ranges.

The OS is only responsible for requiring the user to set an age and providing the age range to software.

The destroyed buildings don't regrow in the spring.

Yes you have.

So this is basically just misinformation. There is no age or identity verification as part of this bill, the age is self-reported by the user and you could select any age you want. The bill requires the operating system to have users select an age when creating an account. The intention is that parents will select their child's age when setting up their child's accounts on phones and computers, to age-gate them from accessing certain software or websites.

Regardless, I don't support this feature being mandatory, because it limits parents' choices. Parents should be able to choose to disable this feature entirely or allow their children to use an OS that does not include this feature, if that is what they feel is appropriate for their child.

That’s why I always run my text through an LLM for refinement before posting it. 😉

Then why won't you say that artificial insemination IS rape?

Because it is not true.

regardless of how much you try to derail the conversation.

Actually, I'm the only one who has stayed on topic and avoided strawman arguments here.

I advocated for broadening the scope of what we call rape to more than just humans. It's anthropocentric to think that only humans can be raped.

I've never contested this. We agree on this point. Continuing to argue it is a strawman.

No, I never make personal attacks or ad hominem. The fact that you've stooped to this level shows that your argument has failed and you cannot use logic or reasoning to back it up.

What does it say that you've downvoted the message "Personal attacks are not welcome here". I think everyone should support that message.

the overwhelming majority of chatbot users run on average about 5 prompts per week, or less than one prompt per day, according to OpenAI’s own usage stats.

the overwhelming majority of chatbot users run on average about 5 prompts per week, or less than one prompt per day, according to OpenAI's own usage stats.