She lawyered so badly we don't even have case law on it?
This scares me a lot. If she doesn't get disbarred, and this somehow gets appealed, and it moves to the supreme court, then this right here could hand trump all of the remaining power the executive could want.
Yeah. I'm pretty sure a lot of us said that from the beginning.
But they never listen. It's a white supremacist party. It has direct lineage to J Edgar Hoover, Joseph McCarthy, and the Confederacy. Conservatives have never been honest, as honesty is against their policy. Power at all cost is their policy. It has always been their policy.
The political party names are bullshit. Liberal is a meaningless term in this country, but they spew it like a firehose to call all opposition it. There are conservatives and progressives. The difference? Conservatives believe some are more equal than others, and progressives believe that equity is more important than most other issues.
I didn't grow up in the 60s or watching the show so maybe I just don't remember seeing her twitch her nose ever. I always thought it was some sort of a quick smirk she did when using her power.
I think you fell for the trick they're trying to sell that the LLMs are capable of "reasoning."
They are not. They are gigantic matricies of numbers that are applied to text after the text has been assigned numbers.
For example, if we stick a fork in an outlet, we will not do it again. If you don't believe me, try it yourself.
An LLM has no means of testing whether or not it is a bad idea.
Additionally, an LLM doesn't have the capability to observe others who test an action.
If LLMs could test their outputs to find the real consequences of their statements, then we would be talking about actual intelligence. For now, they're just number maps.
IDK he might be a little aware. His constant "deer-in-the-headlights" stare might be that awareness just beginning to form and it generates something remotely similar to fear.
That's how Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Leopold II, and so many others achieved massive amounts of death.
Executions don't do that. The Heritage Foundation is interested in thinning the population, and executions are useful for fear and removing specifically interfering and troublesome people from the picture.
Why are they so fascinated with eliminating so much of the population? I do not know. The only thing I can rationalize is that a smaller population is much easier to control and rule, and much less threatening.
A forged indictment would be weird.