You're absolutely on the right track. He was literally based on Trump, per the directors.

Here's the version I have that I think is more accurate

Stop simping for Daddy Donald and fascism, he ain't gonna let you suck his toes.

America has never addressed those issues and we've still regressed so much since Reagan was in office. Fuck the US and fuck the Flavor-Aid about "American Exceptionalism" they pour down our throats from the moment we first enter a school. I found the pledge of undying loyalty weird when I was in elementary school, and I don't like it any more 30 years later with all the other things I now know they lied about or swept under the rug.

America has never been great and I have never been proud to be from this country.

One thing I will say about Obama is that he did try. Years ago, somebody put together a list of all his campaign promises and the only one he didn't do anything about was closing Guantanamo Bay. Every other campaign promise said "blocked by Republicans" next to it. People forget that the rest of the government was controlled by a Republican party who said that even in the short time they didn't have majority control that they'd rather burn the government to the ground than let a black man pass any laws. The Democrats capitulating at every like they always do didn't help, of course, but it wasn't like he didn't try to do what he said he was going to.

All the other stuff he did, though? Yeah, that's on him. There was plenty of "business as usual" during his terms when it came to things like drone strikes on civilians and deportation camps.

There have been numerous studies about this, and they have all shown that this doesn't happen. Canada did a multi-year trial with one town in the 2000s (before the program was shut down and the records sealed/destroyed by the conservative administration once they gained power) that showed a drop in workers in only two groups: high-school kids and pregnant women. It also coincided with a general increase in economic activity as well as a sharp increase in both grades in school and the number of kids graduating and going on to college afterward- especially among poor households. The general theory was that the extra money created financial security in poorer households and high-school kids didn't have to work/drop out and get a job to help put food on the table and could therefore focus more on school and have a better chance at going to college and better job prospects in the future, breaking the cycle of poverty.

Related:

They would, but UHC deemed it unnecessary care and denied their claim.

The Muskrat is the reason why I can't even feel good about anything SpaceX does. Every time they do something to propel space exploration forward, all I can think about is how he and his cronies are going to use it to privatize space for profits.

While I think this was a stupid way to go about risking jail time for a noble cause, I would like to remind everybody here of what everybody in the 60s thought about MLK and his peaceful protests:

There never has nor will there ever be such a thing as "the right way to protest." The right way to protest means out of sight where it can be conveniently ignored.

The argument that these models learn in a way that's similar to how humans do is absolutely false, and the idea that they discard their training data and produce new content is demonstrably incorrect. These models can and do regurgitate their training data, including copyrighted characters.

And these things don't learn styles, techniques, or concepts. They effectively learn statistical averages and patterns and collage them together. I've gotten to the point where I can guess what model of image generator was used based on the same repeated mistakes that they make every time. Take a look at any generated image, and you won't be able to identify where a light source is because the shadows come from all different directions. These things don't understand the concept of a shadow or lighting, they just know that statistically lighter pixels are followed by darker pixels of the same hue and that some places have collections of lighter pixels. I recently heard about an ai that scientists had trained to identify pictures of wolves that was working with incredible accuracy. When they went in to figure out how it was identifying wolves from dogs like huskies so well, they found that it wasn't even looking at the wolves at all. 100% of the images of wolves in its training data had snowy backgrounds, so it was simply searching for concentrations of white pixels (and therefore snow) in the image to determine whether or not a picture was of wolves or not.

I saw some context for this, and the short of it is that headline writers want you to hate click on articles.

What the article is actually about is that there's tons of solar panels now but not enough infrastructure to effectively limit/store/use the power at peak production, and the extra energy in the grid can cause damage. Damage to the extent of people being without power for months.

California had a tax incentive program for solar panels, but not batteries, and because batteries are expensive, they're in a situation now where so many people put panels on their houses but no batteries to store excess power that they can't store the power when it surpasses demand, so the state is literally paying companies to run their industrial stoves and stuff just to burn off the excess power to keep the grid from being destroyed.

Are Millennials hating on Gen Z? I always thought our attitude was more like this:

Also, love how this skips Gen X. Always the forgotten generation.