I’m pretty sure only Americans call it that, and that they do so because they really like mythologising the story of their own founding. How important the event actually was for the rest of the world has nothing to do with it

snag bites of the apex predators

I don’t think the author knows what “apex predator” means

Be cautious about trusting the AI-detection tools, they’re not much better than the AI they’re trying to detect, because they’re just as prone to false positives and false negatives as the agents they claim to detect.

It’s also inherently an arms race, because if a tool exists which can easily and reliably detect AI generated content then they’d just be using that tool for their training instead of what they already use, and the AI would quickly learn to defeat it. They also wouldn’t be worrying about their training data being contaminated by the output of existing AI, Which is becoming a genuine problem right now

You were asking for definitions, and I responded by pointing out that they definitely exist. The fact that you or I don’t personally come from a background which values those definitions doesn’t mean they don’t exist, or that other people don’t use them.

I didn’t actually downvote, but I do object to your characterisation of this as misleading. People aren’t labelling their products with the intent that the people buying it believe they’re eating meat.

Those labels are designed to communicate what sort of thing you can do with it. If you label something “burger”, for example, everyone will understand at a glance what they’re looking at, and that you might like to put it between two buns with some lettuce. It will also catch the attention of people who are looking to make burgers, but might not have considered non-meat options.

Also, common usage of words like “burger” aren’t limited to anything specific. People talk about “chicken burger” or “turkey burger” all the time, for example, and nobody accuses them of trying to trick people into eating chicken. Why not a “lentil burger” as well?

Various holy books, I believe. See also pescetarianism, which stems from the same place

I’m pretty sure they’re referring to the incompetence, not the unfair trial

You know, I hadn’t even considered that. So many people use that ridiculous faux-censorship in earnest that I just assumed that was what I was reading.

If it was a joke, then I apologise

There’s no rape joke here, nobody aside from you even implied anything non-consentual

It sounds like the actual sales pitch is that it’ll teach you to draw, which is a very different proposition than just being a replacement for paper and pencils.

Still a scam, obviously, but pitching itself as something which would be legitimately interesting to some people

The Artemis program depends on Starship, since they’re using it for the lander. I cannot imagine a world where starship works well enough to do that, but can’t do any of the things SLS is supposed to be used for.

That being the case, they should abandon SLS altogether

Throwing paint into a jet engine really is damage. You gave to take the engine apart and meticulously clean out the paint before you can run it again, because otherwise the engine could do itself serious harm next time it’s started. That’s a very expensive thing to do.

That actually makes it a very effective act of protest, which is why the government has come down so hard on them

In some contexts, perhaps. I assure you that skill will remain relevant when programming aircraft or nuclear reactors

I thought you were implying that the survey was so unreliable that we couldn’t reach any conclusions about support for Israel, or the lack thereof. I was trying to point out that we could (tenuously) reach at least one conclusion.

While you’re not wrong, I think framing it as “israel-hamas” rather than “israel-palestine” is the least favourable framing available (for a supporter of Palestine) without resorting to really obvious leading questions.

As such, seeing a majority opinion against Israel is encouraging. I’d expect a more nuanced survey to swing more heavily against Israel

Oh, absolutely. It’s not something which should be encouraged, and against a well designed modern system it probably isn’t possible (there must be some challenge-response type NFC systems on the market).

I’m just saying it isn’t unambiguously “illegitimate”

That’s probably debatable, if they have permission. They probably shouldn’t have been given permission, but that’s a separate issue

Sure, there are countries that the US government says US businesses can’t do business with. What the governments of those countries think is irrelevant, in principle, unless they have some leverage they can apply.

If a business has no presence in a country, and the government of wherever they’re hosted has no interest in enforcing the other countries law for them, then threatening of fining the business is largely irrelevant. Note that this letter we’re commenting on doesn’t say “this order is invalid, and we’re going to challenge it in court”. It says “it’s irrelevant, and we intend to ignore it”. They go on to say they’re going to ask a US court to back them up, but that’s actually incidental to the legal statement they’re making.

The UK courts only really control what happens in the UK, at the end of the day. That’s what sovereignty is. If they decide 4chan is a sufficiently significant problem then there are a bunch of things they could tell people in the UK to do about it, like block the site, but 4chan seems to think that they can’t tell 4chan to do anything at all.

Beside which, what I was actually saying is that not being in the UK has nothing whatsoever to do with accepting payment from people who are

What on earth does that have to do with anything?

If someone offers to make and post custom Christmas cards to people, are you saying they should care which country the person paying them is in? Why would that matter at all?

There is no federal statute mandating that a private business, a person, or an organization must accept currency or coins as payment for goods or services.

The federal reserve disagrees with you. https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12772.htm

When you want to buy something, that isn’t a debt. It’s only a debt if you already own the thing and haven’t paid for it yet, so the law about accepting dollars in payment for debt doesn’t apply.