![](https://lemmy.nz/pictrs/image/b34100ff-4085-4ee6-ad0a-ca6dc746bae5.jpeg)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
I don’t know, if I was IT decision-making and I worked for a company I didn’t particularly like I might install this for the executive stratosphere and hope for subpoenas.
I don’t know, if I was IT decision-making and I worked for a company I didn’t particularly like I might install this for the executive stratosphere and hope for subpoenas.
They’re a little late, the conviction has happened. If they wanted to interfere with the outcome of the trial they should have done that before the verdict. Silly treasonous fascists.
Not saying they’re right, just I think that’s what was being referenced.
I think they might be remembering that time Spain evicted all the Jews?
I think both have their uses. A true state backed cryptocurrency used interchangeably with physical cash could be quite useful. Crypto as it is now not so much.
AI has a bunch of useful applications in medicine, manufacture, research, monitoring… But where we see it is language models, art remixes, and deep fakes.
He’s on social media. This could probably be arranged.
If I really like something, I get my own copy. Because I don’t like corporations deciding what I’m allowed to enjoy.
I’m thinking it doesn’t matter what we think, it matters which one could accrue expensive court costs. Because “false claim” is specific and provable, “lied” is murky and general. When it comes to libel and slander lawsuits, the legal system runs on semantics and pedantry.
Why should they open themselves to that kind of legal system enabled retribution? After all, we all know whose pants are on fire.