Coty

I’d have had an aunt on my father’s side if it weren’t for whooping cough. I feel like maybe not enough families passed down stories of the relatives that would have been.

I went for the first time last year. I am not there this year.

I don’t have any bananas at the office or I would be trying to replicate right now. Sounds ideal.

A stainless-steel, side-by-side refrigerator with a built-in touchscreen display on the right door. The screen shows a bright yellow Apple TV+ advertisement reading “WE’RE SORRY WE UPSET YOU, CAROL” for the series Pluribus. The left door includes a water and ice dispenser. The fridge is in a modern kitchen with small appliances visible in the background.

Fresh dystopian hell from Samsung fridges with ads.

I mean—in my particular case, it has for some time. Possibly ever.

There’s a guy on tiktok who’s trying to replace ChatGPT by first drinking a ton of water and then answering people’s questions poorly 💀

Critical Security Vulnerability in React Server Components – React The library for web and native user interfaces

A perfect CVSS 10 🧑🏻‍🍳💋

CVE-2025-55182: Unauthenticated remote code execution vulnerability in React Server Components

The vuln is in versions 19.0, 19.1.0, 19.1.1, and 19.2.0:

react-server-dom-webpack
react-server-dom-parcel
react-server-dom-turbopack

Upgrade immediately!

Shoot. My listening age was 25, and my chronological age is further from that than from 81.

Trump Administration Live Updates: President Plans to Pardon Democratic Lawmaker From Texas

Trump reaching across the aisle to support corruption regardless of party. A uniter, not a divider. www.nytimes.com/live/2025/12...

Wait. Hang on. Her book is titled “American Canto”?

I’ll believe that AI can make art when it can get arrested for the art it makes.

The psychological effect of this transition must be massive. Formerly, people were just walking around with these horrendous traumas as the unspoken backdrop of their lives.

I should really follow your “not looking up shit” approach.

AD-ROCK: Yo Ebenezer you gotta show re-
BEASTIES: MORSE
AD-ROCK: Redemption is not a mere matter of
Beasties: COURSE
MIKE D: We’ll show you Bob Cratchit’s not a lazy
BEASTIES: MOOCHER
MCA: We’re Christmas Past
MIKE D: Christmas Present
BEASTIES: AND CHRISTMAS FUTURE

This is inconvenient information, but there is not one kind of AI/ML technology that only does the good use cases and a different kind of AI/ML that only does the bad use cases

We've created the protagonist of Memento, from the famous film Don't Use Externalized Memory to Rewrite Your Own Identity Like in Memento.

Guardrails are hard.

As I’ve said before, I don’t do much with generative image/video models, but I’m surprised how willing Gemini/Nano Banana Pro is to generate images of public figures. I’m also surprised by how reluctant it is to generate an image of Hugh Jackman in a Speedo as compared to Margot Robbie in a bikini.

I _think_ that level exists, too. I just know that right now and into the foreseeable future, all signs point to greater wealth concentration and not much redistribution or free distribution.

There is not, and I think OU could have successfully defended this case had the student/TPUSA sued. However, I do think the rubric and grading response left more room than was necessary to argue viewpoint discrimination based on the student’s religious beliefs.

So you don’t think the student/TPUSA was prepared to sue the university?

I agree with all of that, but I think it would be adjudicated as a 1A case no matter what I think about it.

I’m not a lawyer, but the OP is, and I think that is their opinion as well—unless I misread them.

I am aware of the student’s mother’s statements. I’m not sure how that is relevant to the 1A question.

The First Amendment doesn’t compel anyone to give the student a good grade, and I don’t think she deserved one. It does compel the university to ensure that the grade was not influenced by the student’s viewpoint, and I think there are small points in the grading response that open up that risk.

I did, and I found it compelling. I read it before reading the rubric, though, and I thought the rubric left more space for subjective reaction than I’d expected.

Fair. I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t agree with the student’s viewpoint. I don’t think the paper was written and submitted in good faith. I do think that giving it 0/25 may have done more harm than good. Then again, given my prior good faith comment, any low grade might have had the same result.

The rubric seems relatively open. If her response was graded particularly harshly based on her reaction’s being based on her religious perspective (though I don’t know that it was), that would seem to expose the university to 1A litigation and thus might constrain the teacher’s grading. No?

What part of the rubric did they ignore? I want to be clear that I think it was a poor—and likely bad faith—response. However, giving it 0/25 based on the three criteria I see in the rubric seems to open it to claims of viewpoint discrimination.

And the teacher’s grading standards are not constrained by 1st Amendment considerations?

But isn’t this ultimately a lawyer-ass issue?