I mean... Yeah, no shit. It's not therapy, and your chatbot shouldn't be pretending to offer professional services that require a license, Sam.

Let's be truthful. You don't want to have to explain or justify anything that your chatbot says, and you don't want the Courts to be able to analyze whether you've violated any rights or laws either.

None. All 4 Democrats on the committee voted in favor. It wasn't a floor vote, it was an amendment to a crypto bill in committee.

Meanwhile, health officials said seven children were killed after an Israeli air strike targeted a water distribution site in central Gaza. The Israeli military has claimed that the strike was a result of a "technical malfunction" that had caused the missile to fall "dozens of metres from the target".

So in other words, they weren't trying to hit children with the missile, they were instead trying to hit the water source, which would've killed those children as well as many more people. That's much better.

His main priority is establishing that the US elections are a sham being manipulated by the Left, so that his administration can step in and take appropriate measures to ensure the security of future elections as things go forward towards the midterms.

Well... as the article pretty explicitly mentions, they would normally have staged resources at a nearer location so that their response could be more rapid, but Noem's new rules hampered them by being overly burdensome. And Texan crews were already operating.

This doesn't invalidate your point, but DF is still under active development. The game has been worked on consistently since the early aughts.

For the free (no-interest) versions, it's a bullshit legal loophole in the US credit laws, or at least it was a few years ago. May have been more strongly codified since, though I bet almost nobody who could close it realizes the gap is there. The whole scheme is out of Australia, but I have no idea what their legal setup is.

The US requirements are basically:

• You can't charge fees to host the plan
• You can't charge % late fees, only fixed
• You can't have more than 4 installments, meaning no more than 5 payments if you include an optional down payment
• You must not deny customers for means-based items, or using credit data. You can give them an effectively meaningless approval value though.

You as a customer pay late fees if you miss a payment, but they make most of their money by charging the merchant a higher transaction fee. So, it's theoretically free for the customer, meaning it can fit into the loophole. Legally it isn't a credit product.

The TL;DR is "because the law is full of holes and bullshit, and if it's making people money then it's not likely to change"

Hey! Be reasonable. We're the leaders in lots of things! Obesity, maternal mortality relative to our medical technology, incarceration rates, destitution from medical expenses, incompetent and corrupt rapist executives... All sorts of things!

U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!

It's not though, it's a very direct exposure to other viewpoints. Those who can't reflect on the consequences weren't going to be convinced by you talking at them in any case.

Pretty sure it's Make America Horrible Again

On the bright side, this probably means you could refuse to turn over ANY footage to the police by Pleading the Fifth.

This instance (and I refer to the instance to intentionally be inclusive of both Ada and our community) takes issue with certain kinds of content, at least while we're on our local accounts.

Admins from another instance have taken the stance that this sort of content is not, by their own evaluation, harmful enough to be removed from their instance. That's a subjective choice about what they feel is right for their users, even if I disagree with the position.

Blahaj has decided that exposing the community to that sort of content, knowing it will not be removed by the remote instance, is not worth doing. However, in the interest of transparency and allowing users choice, has made sure its community is aware of the change.

Blahaj users who still wish to engage with the instance can easily still do so with accounts homed on other instances, should there be Communities or content that are of value to them.

What part of this do you have an issue with? This is how most people SHOULD be living their lives. If there's something that doesn't enrich your life, find ways of mitigating its impact. Don't like some vegetables? Find new recipes or supplement the nutrition otherwise. Uncle is kind of a douchebag? Stop going to holidays at his house. Friend holds political views you disagree with? Make sure your engagements with them are still something you enjoy.

Nobody is saying that there won't be aspects of life that are negative AND unavoidable. People have shitty jobs, terrible families, poor health. Why should that mean they should accept worse things in the parts of their life they do have discretion?