This is exactly something that has annoyed me in a sports community I follow back on Reddit. Posts with titles along the lines of “I asked ChatGPT what it thinks will happen in the game this weekend and here is what it said”.

Why? What does ChatGPT add to the conversation here? Asking the question directly in the subreddit would have encouraged the same discussion.

We’ve also learned nothing about the OPs opinion on the matter, other than maybe that they don’t have one. And even more to the point, it’s so intellectually lazy that it just feels like karma farming. “Ya I have nothing to add but I do love me them updoots”.

I would rather someone posted saying they knew shit all about the sport but they were interested, than someone feigning knowledge by using ChatGPT as some sort of novel point of view, which it never is. It’s ways the most milquetoast response possible, ironically adding less to the conversation than the question it’s responding to.

But that argument always just feels overly combative for what is otherwise a pretty relaxed sports community. It’s just not worth having that fight there.

I don’t want to frighten off or disincentivize investment into America by outside countries or companies

Says the guy who stopped any and all US government investment into companies and countries outside America. It’s like that comic of the dog with a ball; “no take, only give”.

Does that mean there could be species which humans want to fuck, but which would not consider humans intelligent enough to give proper consent?

Even the best comedians will do sets in little comedy clubs or at backroom open mics while they're writing material for their next tour to see what works. Failure is, after all, the first step to success.

I'd leave the people at the next table in the cafe alone though. They're no there for some random guys inner monologue.

A computer: does anything.

Tech journalists: is this AI?

The VLC guy turned down what a quick search is telling me was “several tens of millions” to show ads. I can’t even imagine what getting people to drop ublock would be worth.

The uBlock Origin chrome extension has had 34 million users. Chrome has 3.45 billion users.

Even if every uBlock user switched, it’s less than 1% of chrome users.

It's not necessarily about a threat to instances or users. It's more an issue with how Meta could potentially hijack the protocol the whole thing is built on, and do damage in the long run. There's a write up here on how similar things have happened in the past;

https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html

Ronaldo plays for a football team based in Saudi Arabia. That sheikh whose name I forget, the one who murdered the journalist Jamal Khashogi, was in Washington meeting with Trump. Said sheikh brought Ronaldo along, presumably because he’s good buddies with Ronaldo and wanted to show off his fancy sports puppet to Trump.

Ronaldo is also a petulant little child who got sent off for elbowing a player in a match against Ireland last week.

I’m more surprised they didn’t try to corner the thieving and grifting market for their own.

I’m guessing they mean people who repeatedly do refunds. If you’re getting a refund on every game you’re probably abusing the system.

The only people that read xkcd are those that can understand it

If that was true, there’d be no need for ExplainXKCD.com.

And even then on some of the more physics-y ones I just give Randall the benefit of the doubt that it’s funny.

Either;

A. You don’t take on any new tasks before the meeting. You’re already too distracted by the meeting to start anything new. So now you’re sitting there killing time for an hour until the meeting starts. You were doodling in a notepad, missed the start of the meeting, and joined 5 minutes late.

B. You were working on something and didn’t realise it was meeting time. Someone messages you 5 minutes after the meeting started, reminding you to join. You’ve completely forgotten what the meeting is about and it takes you a further 5 minutes to get your bearings.

The first carbon neutral war since the invention of gun powder.

Marah Sichelle Gellar?

A society so advanced they’re holding productive, 3-minute meetings purely for the social aspect. Long enough to be productive, not so long you want to burn the whole god damned place to the ground.

Funnily enough, Shawn is the anglicisation of the Irish name Seán, so spelled for the reasons outlined in the OP.

I think there’s a bit in the first book where Harry says his parents were shot, and Hagrid laughs and says no muggle gun could have killed them.

But like, why not? It’s never explained. I’m sure if they survived being shot, magic medicine would sort them out pretty quickly. But there’s no reassign to think a gun couldn’t kill them. Wizards struggle to react fast enough to block spell s most of the time, and bullets seem to move faster than that.

I think the hardest part would be successfully ambushing Voldy, but no reason to think a gun wouldn’t fuck him up if you can hit him.

To be fair, printers are a bad example. They're fundamentally broken and no one can fix them.

Gaming journalists sure want a Sony monopoly of gaming consoles, don’t they?

Despite the inflammatory headline, I don't think that's really the point of the article. It's much less "why even bother", and more "do they even know what they're doing over there"?

Any hatred the writer has for Xbox seems to be focused on how Microsoft are running things, not letting the studios take chances or even make a bit of a dud game.

As a platform, the point of Xbox is supposed to be to make things people enjoy. But MS seem hyper-focused on insane rates of growth, more users, more subscribers, bigger profits. Anything that doesn't fit that gets cut, regardless of how well it was received by fans or critics.

I don't get the impression the writer hates Xbox, but is just frustrated that they've been making the same mistake over and over again, which has allowed Sony to dominate the console space.