rgblambda

With a very small number of exceptions, including changing the maximum duration of Parliament from 5 years.

The version I've heard is that you can pin the blame on the consultants if it goes wrong.

Panorama is technically part of News. The CEO of News resigned over the trump edit as well as the Director General. Though an independent production company (October Films) produced the documentary, they claim BBC News Panorama team had final say over the editing. The BBC doesn't seem to have ever disputed this.

I replied with more detail to someone who also asked this in the same thread.

If his ancestors remained in England following the viking age, then he's 0% viking. I take it he's conflating vikings with the great heathen army.

The keyword is "often". As in, it's repeated throughout the year. The homily is supposed to be, but isn't always, an explanation of the Gospel story that was told just before it. So there really shouldn't be homily repeats within the liturgical calendar.

You are supposed to attend Mass every Sunday, so I don't think the priest is intentionally accomodating infrequent churchgoers at the expense of the regulars. And it's usually not a sermon that worked well, just a long meandering story, typically about a pilgrimage or retreat the priest went on 10 years ago, that doesn't really have a point to it.

Again, not defending the use of AI. My comment was more as a general response to people who maybe don't have a real life experience of listening to Catholic homilies and have unrealistic ideas of how much effort priests would normally put into them pre-ChatGPT.

In retrospect, I probably should have replied to a specific comment.

Not defending the use of AI, but plenty of people who grew up going to Mass on Sunday know that priests often recycle old homilies, deliver lazily written homilies or homilies that were clearly pulled from the internet, or just skip them if they couldn't think of anything that week or are running late for something.

Absolute worst was when an intelligent priest put in incredible effort, only for it to go over the heads of the yokels in their parish who want a simpler homily.

>If there is a direct call to action then they should be held responsible

>They directed people to kill and as such they were guilty.

I'm glad we finally reached an agreement that people can and should be held criminally responsible for their words.

>They cannot use the excuse they were following orders.

Good, though that's not what was being argued. I think you knew that though.

"No officer. I didn't smash the window. It was the bat I was swinging. You should arrest the bat".

People were sentenced to death at Nuremberg for giving orders, written and spoken.

It's well established in every legal jurisdiction that individuals are responsible for the words they use.

In the 1950s, the Reverend Ian Paisley would organise rallies in the streets of Belfast and when speaking at those rallies, read out the addresses of Catholic homes and businesses on those streets. The crowd would then attack those homes and businesses.

Well they're not an alternative, so I suppose not. No one is being chained to a desk and made to author reports on how their department is aligning with the new business growth strategy. And the robot slaves aren't being designed to mine precious minerals or attach buttons to clothes.

chasd00 did mention that this was for consulting projects, where presumably there's a handover to another team after a period of time. Maintainability was never a high priority for consultants.

But in general I agree with your point.

I can't locate the article unfortunately.

Ad based revenue comes with its own problems. But I doubt there's that many readers who so ferociously disagree with an article that they then refuse to consume any more free content from that outlet any more, which is what happens when someone cancels their subscription. So, to me it makes sense that ad supported news outlets don't suffer as much from having a wider range of views.

>Maybe the difference in that case is that they will publish content that attracts people from various political extremes? That certainly wouldn't make them less polarized though

Replace "extremes" with "views". Most people aren't extremists. I don't understand why being exposed to various views would not make them less polarised?

The Economist (ironically a subscription based publication) reported that subscriptions for news media results in greater political polarisation. When the news outlets says something subscribers don't like, they run the risk of losing those subscribers. This incentivises appealing to a specific set of political beliefs and coddling the customer.

That, unfortunately has pushed advertisers into guerrilla marketing tactics like posts and comments disguised as genuine user behaviour. It means we now need to parse whether what we're looking at is an ad or not.

Maybe they would have done that anyway though.

Hope you understand this is the equivalent of an ice cream parlour handing out free ice cream because the freezer broke. It has nothing to do with government agricultural policies or subsidies. Otherwise your friends would be getting their free spuds every week.

>Here in the EU, farmers are giving away subsidized potatoes in Berlin currently.

I looked into this story because it doesn't sound correct. It seems the potatoes were indeed sold but due to an unusually high yield this year, the trader decided not to pick them up so the farmer gave them away rather than try to find another buyer. And it was just one farm in Saxony. So this is not an EU or even a Germany wide issue.

>bible story at the end

Unless they've revamped the format since I've last been, the bible stories (plural) are at the start and middle of mass.

I would imagine individual states would manage their own health services, with the federal government acting as more of a coordinating and standard setting body. At least that's how it works in UK, Spain etc.

The thrill of weaving through traffic vs the tedium of being the traffic might be the real incentive, whether the driver is consciously aware of that or not.

>Hebrew was literally synthesised a century ago.

I had heard somewhere that much of the vocabulary of Modern Hebrew consists of loanwords from Arabic. Is this correct and if so, would it mean that the "cleanliness" of the language is more a reflection of Modern Standard Arabic?

Apologies in advance if this is seen as some falsehood or if it's a sensitive topic.

>I don’t believe we had that button at the founding

Every government everywhere has and has always had state secrets e.g. names of spies.

>make being involved with witness harm at any layer of indirection a capital offense.

People still commit capital offenses. This just makes it much easier to get to that witness and get away. We also know from empirical evidence that the death penalty is not useful for deterring crime.

Witness protection is also getting to start over without everyone in your neighborhood knowing you were a criminal. It's part of the deal.

I thought you were making this up, as it sounds too ridiculous to be true. But no, it's a real thing.

The key to his success seems, at a glance, to be raising his media profile by taking controversial positions (which I suspect he may not sincerely hold) that guarantee news coverage. Similar to how populist politicians in the UK game the BBC's "balance" policy by always taking a contrarian position to any given topic to secure an interview or place on a discussion panel.

Wouldn't they just trade through their relatives? Or does the insider trading immunity not stretch that far?

My point is that they clearly haven't sat down with a lawyer, so don't know what the appropriate response is.

I suspect they'd get told to calm down while the lawyer sends a letter to the authorities explaining what they're currently attempting to articulate via social media.

The lead developer seems to have a history of this style of communication in response to any minor critique of himself or GrapheneOS.

A European Arrest Warrant would make the entire EU off limits. Which makes me think they haven't thought this through and are just overreacting, as many on this thread suspect.

If the GrapheneOS maintainers were being advised by a lawyer, they'd surely know that if French Authorities wanted them arrested and they were standing on a street corner in Stockholm, they could just as easily be picked up by police as if they were in a café in Paris. Making the whole France travel ban just a load of theatrics.

Not to mention there'd be at least a few students too timid to challenge the teacher, even if they knew they got it right.

If there has been a rise in the amount of harassment due to the pandemic, then why have actual convictions dropped compared to before the pandemic. I refer to the graph of convictions per year in the HoL report linked above.

>But you just said we don't know, because offence type is not provided?

If someone is arrested but not convicted, we must presume innocence. "Legal speech" isn't a type of offence.

>And it's not 30 arrests per day for saying things the government don't like or that are politically incorrect, is it?

We don't know, as offence type isn't provided by police services.

The key takeaway is that arrests have risen since 2020 while convictions have not. Given the sole evidence needed for a conviction is also needed for an arrest, you'd think convictions would rise at almost the same level. But it looks like people are being arrested and later released for perfectly legal speech. That would arguably be seen by many as an impairment of freedom of expression.