It’s not just the lead you’d have to worry about. Commercial jets spew all kinds of nasty shit, and there’s also the significant amount of particulates in the air from the tires. It’s just not safe nor healthy to live that close to an airport, lead or no lead.
Also, I would absolutely not eat the produce from those farms, which according to TFA, they’re still producing and selling locally.
This sounds like the setting for a Guy Ritchie film.
Just imagine the average reddit, twitter, facebook, and instagram content. Then realize that half of that content is dumber than that. That’s half of what these AI models use to learn. The “smarter” half is probably filled with sarcasm, inside jokes, and other types of innuendo that the AI at this stage has no chance of understanding correctly.
Did you read what I wrote? I’m responding to @Gigan@lemmy.world’s original statement of “So 100% of women have been sexually assaulted?”. @boogetyboo@aussie.zone then responded with “Every woman I know including myself has?”. I simply replied saying that “Everyone I know” is not the same as “100% of women”.
If you read all of that, and you’re standing by your reply, then it sounds like you’re agreeing with me and @Gigan@lemmy.world by stating “Assaulted? No.”
But too many have been sexually harassed at least once. I think it was 1 in 3 girls experiences sexual harassment before age 18.
I completely agree with you. But that’s not what my comment was about.
Every woman I know including myself has?
Your anecdotal experience doesn’t equate to 100% of women.
You don’t have to believe anything. It’s not a faith based system.
It’s also not an anecdote-based system.
Just speak to women and you’ll hear how common it is.
Common is not equal to all. OP is doubting the implication that all women have been assaulted.
It wasn’t. Fisker’s shitty response is what made it an even bigger deal.
Friend, I’ve read this three times and still have no idea wtf you’re trying to say.
Same. It loads the page where the tweet would be, then it seems like 2 popups cover it up, both about logging in. I immediately no longer care about viewing what I wanted to see, and close the window.
You’re so close to the answer! Keep going one more step!
Maybe Shop Pay? I didn’t read the article, just guessing.
Blah blah blah
And this deal was vetted and approved by which working voice actors?
Don’t trip on your way to go get some.
Probably referring to this one: https://youtu.be/iYhCn0jf46U
Inb4 piped bot!
Yep. Drill down one level in a few control panel items and you’re back in win xp.
This is extremely annoying, and it’s been a documented enhancement request from the community for years. What’s even more confusing is that it’s only a problem on Android – it works properly on all desktop environments and iOS. I have no idea why they won’t fix it for Android.
Comparing the level of effort to run windows vs Linux is a whole other thing I’m definitely not getting into. I use Linux for work and run it on two machines at home, but I also use my Windows box for games. You can use and enjoy both, it doesn’t have to be a religious war.
You can use Rufus to install windows 11 and bypass the requirements. It does everything for you – downloads the latest win 11 service pack, removes the blocking requirements, and you can even tell it to automatically disable all of the telemetry and phoning home. You’ll still need a license key when you install, or run it on a machine that was running a valid win 10 install previously. But I’m running win 11 on an 8 year old PC with zero issues.
Here is a good guide that explains in detail.
At the end of the day, Google’s paying them more for my views than if I were an ad-viewing user. So for ~$20/mo (for family plan), that’s much more financially viable for me than if I were to pay $1/mo to all 100+ creators I watch.
Are you trolling? It feels like you are. At no point in this thread is anyone saying you need to start paying more. If you’re paying $20/mo for premium, and you’re using an arbitrary amount of $1 as the donation minimum per creator, then why not just donate $1 to 20 different creators for each month? Then the next month, donate to the next 20 creators, then the next 20, and so on. Believe it or not, all of those creators still get paid more by your direct donations – even measured over several months – compared to the tiny fraction they’d get from that same money via your premium subscription.
It seems like you’re trying to argue some moral high ground of funding content you enjoy on youtube. That’s fine. But it takes about 10 seconds of critical thinking to find ways to do it where you pay the same, the creators get paid more, and google gets paid nothing.
As much as I would love to support all of those creators directly, it’s not a financially viable option for me.
No one’s suggesting you pay more than what you’re paying now. I simply suggested you pay them directly. Take whatever you’re paying per month/year to google directly, then divide that up and contribute directly to the creators of your choosing.
which is more than they’d get from me if I was adblocking their videos
Now you’re moving the goalposts. No one is arguing against the fact that content creators get some amount of money from ads and subscriptions. The argument was that donating to them directly is better / more revenue for the creators, since google doesn’t get a cut. You spend the same amount, the creators get paid more, google gets paid nothing.
It’s bizarre how you are such an apologist for google.
That’s the joke. Nearly every proposed implementation of AI isn’t actually solving a real business or tech problem. It’s just the next snake oil, like block chain, quantum computing, etc. There are real, valid use cases for all of those things. But most companies have no idea what they really are, how they might help, and even if they could help, what it would take to implement to see real results.