Jamie

Notice that as afraid they are of foreigners, they will let anyone saying they are self deporting board a plane with a less secure ID.

I think most terrorists planning to blow up a plane won't care if they are allowed back in the country.

I'm all for vigorous prosecution of this, but mostly if Musk is next

Washington Post Headline: What Trump Wants From The Rest Of The World.

Correct answer not in the article:
Bribes

But here in the US, we have a real loonie

There is no doubt. Everyone should have a chance.

Any lawyer actively working to punish other lawyers for offering representation to any client should be disbarred

News flash. There is no line item veto. The executive branch doesn't have the constitutional authority to make budget cuts like this

Fiddling on the golf course while America burns

This along with tariffs that are nothing but a type of sales taxes, push the tax burden even further on to those who can least afford it

for decades, the right wing has wanted to replace the income tax with a sales tax because it shifts the tax burden towards lower income earners. Tariffs are a sales tax and coupled with massive tax relief for the wealthiest, it does just that

When I was a Republican county chair in the 90s, Republicans believed in local control. This is the federal government stomping on states rights and free speech

That would be an improvement they actually based it on trade deficits as if a small, poor country should import as much from us as we buy from them.

Poor Justice Kavanaugh

We need that graffiti on the Resolute desk

"I especially need to keep my medical benefits right now and would probably lose them if I told you what I really thought"

I'm aware of Europe's good work on this. That doesn't erase the point that some types of regulation are much worse for small businesses and researchers than for huge corporations. This is the key point EFF was making here. I'm suggesting even stronger regulations, but limiting them to the big guys

I shared eff's skepticism of this regulation as is. I suggested having it only apply to large firms so it wouldn't stifle research and startups. I am fine with lots of stricter regulation on the likes of Google, Amazon, Musk, Open AI, etc.

I ran a tech company in the 90s too and also got out. Innovation is far from done and I don't buy Schumpeter. Change is inevitable. Neither authoritarianism nor anarchy is the best answer. Accountable, adaptable regulation based on reality rather than ideology is the best bet. I know history

When the right talks about freedom they mean enforced conformity to right wing ideology

We absolutely need small startups in every field even though most will fail, so I'm not naive, but your argument doesn't have much to offer. I am for massive regulations of the big AI firms or those that become big.

Lawyers arguing that lawyers should be punished for offering constitutional representation should themselves be disbarred.

It's almost as if there ought to be process that's, I don't know, due.

That list is only moderately accurate for tech giants. It doesn't apply to the cases eff is defending.

I am sympathetic to your concerns, but the enforcement needs to be focused on the large for-profit tech giants, not small research teams. The difference between how AI makes derivative work is not significantly different from how brains work.

The trouble with this approach is that currently all AI information produced has human input. The design, training and prompting are human activities that are necessary to produce the results.

If the argument is that the AI is independent and creative, perhaps it should have rights.

The best point is that the giant firms need the most restrictions and small startups, hobbyists and non corporate researchers that aren't close to significant profits shouldn't have these restrictions.

Perhaps having a minimum size cutoffs would be best.

One big piece of evidence that AI training is more like viewing or reading material than stealing it, is that they don't store sufficient data to make accurate copies of the works.

It really isn't legally different from a person creating derivative works from what they've seen, read and studied.

But this is why the right wing loves him now.

West Ada teacher stands firm after she’s told to remove ‘Everyone is welcome here’ signs Sarah Inama said she was told by administrators that her signs “don’t allow people to express differing opinions.”

A teacher in Idaho has been told to remove posters reading "Everyone is welcome here" - specifically because it features different skin tones. As I wrote last week, this is a global political movement that has explicitly set the goal of eradicating the very concept of equality.

The video shouldn't be protecting the agents faces