rideontime

Because "we" want the assets now?

Do you have any particular evidence to support this claim?

What?

Something can still be a crime even if it isn't effectively enforced.

It's not unreasonable to expect End Wokeness to be spreading more lies about Somalian immigrants, given his track record. But the truth here was obvious to anybody willing to simply look at the evidence.

Now that the story has been retracted, and the "real" image proven to be an obvious fake, are you mad that someone sought to manipulate you?

OJP has published a retraction. https://www.oregonjournalismproject.org/editors-note-october...

Then just try looking in the bottom left corner of the "real" image to see the leftovers of the upside-down flag. The SynthID watermark isn't even necessary here to spot the obviousness of the fake.

Please just look at the bottom left corner of the "real" image.

There's only two images in the article, the "real" (fake) image (which appears twice), and the screenshot of the tweet; the latter returns "No OpenAI signals detected" for me, unlike the other.

As much as I hate to have to defend Jack Posobiec (aka EndWokeness), saving the "real" screenshot from this article and uploading it to OpenAI's verification tool[0] indicates that it, in fact, was AI-generated. I welcome any correction on this.

[0] https://openai.com/research/verify/

e: Okay, now I feel stupid for even bothering to do that. Look below her name and you'll see the leftovers of the old flag.

edit 2: Retracted. https://www.oregonjournalismproject.org/editors-note-october...

Not terrific signs for the AI industry or the economies that have come to depend on them, perhaps.

No, it will not.

The comment was seven minutes old when you posted this reply, on a 19-hour-old post.

Fuck along, now.

He may have been "rude," but he was leaving his honest feedback. You, on the other hand, publicly posted what appeared to be criticism on a third party's project, with no disclosure that your comment was actually part of some unrelated personal feud. You are in no position to accuse anybody else of acting in "bad faith."

By actually solving the problem that leaves contacting the CEO as the only solution available to the customer.

It only works if one measures their success in Twitter likes.

Maybe the headline should be edited. Right now, those who see only the headline are misled into believing that he has "returned as CEO," when evidence can only confirm that he is in control of the company's official communication channels.

How bizarre. He's attempting to troll you by leaving a negative comment on a different person's post?

Sean has said so explicitly in multiple videos, including the "deep dive" video for today's update.

And you don't see being laid off due to the business's failure as being "responsible to the business"?

You truly don't see the difference between those two examples?

Are you confusing CEOs with founders, shareholders, etc.? Chief Executive Officer is, in fact, a "job."

Many people observe reality, where the workers end up being the ones held accountable for the CEO's decisions, not the CEO.

Not very? Why would a TOS-violating feature like this be included as a default feature of an OS?

It is not difficult to understand why you are being downvoted. You are insisting that your own personal observations are the absolute truth, and rejecting everyone else's.

This is not a conversation about mothers. The root of this thread was referring to "accessibility of public-facing government communications."

An open platform could be as simple as hosting their own website. You don’t need to be in a “bubble” to know about websites.

Understandable, and "Windows Classic blue" might not be useless if it had a function - let the user filter down to the OSes that shared a given color, so that the reason for it being named such is more clear.