And any question in a headline can be answered with no. Otherwise it would be a statement.

Yeah, if anyone is bothered by which hand I hold my fork in, I’d say they should see a therapist and work it out on their end.

Nobody would or could see the evidence as that would be very weird, immoral and also illegal. Very easy for the people denying it to just call it fake news or AI or whatever. It would require trust in the justice system which is pretty much non existent for MAGA followers, and more recently also eroded in the saner part of the population (albeit for better reasons).

Could it be developed as an add on to the main slicer software, and developed on the down low, with a big disclaimer saying it’s “just for educational purposes”.

I remember listening to Frank Zappa’s Bobby Brown when I was a kid, not knowing English at all. Great song but very inappropriate for kids, which my parents probably thought was funny.

If someone makes threats you have to assume they’re serious and not just wave it away as “unclear”.

Or a tax?

I think what he is getting at is that democrats could be more “aggressive” in how to appeals to the working class people. These subtle policies that have marginal benefit don’t have enough perceived impact.

Democrats could promise something simple and with clear benefits to common folks, something that can be easily understood. People want change. I think Bernie was almost getting there when he was running.

MAGA fans have jumped on the bandwagon of “sticking it to the man”, and “draining the swamp”. Which is kind of what Bernie wants to do but sincerely, with a track record to prove it.

Edit: added “perceived “

That’s a pretty dishonest description of Bernie. I don’t dare to say if your statement about unions is true, and it might as well be, but what Bernie is saying here is that it’s not enough. He’s arguing the democrats need to be more progressive. Feel free to disagree with his suggestion though.

I do think that the bigger problem is that the average person lacks the general understanding of how policies affect their lives. They want simple answers and Trump is giving them that. People are shortsighted and have a hard time grasping the bigger picture, and rather vote based on a gut feeling.

It would be a little better if everyone could vote, regardless of felony stays.

Does it do what Perplexity does?

No bun intended…

Probably, but it would depend on how much gross revenue they make on said practice, and how often they get a fine.

Seem much smarter and humane to redistribute the resources, and direct most of those resources to find resource efficient processes.

No

Sure, those are probably reasonable speculations, but your suggested title was very absolute. Hence I was wondering if you had more concrete reasons to suggest that title.

Please expand, what do you know about the motives?

It wasn’t tens of millions deaths if that’s what you’re implying. An atrocity but always good to stay to the facts.

If there is money to be made those companies would make deals for data/ad-space, it’s just that they will do it in competition with other ad services and search services for example. That’s how a healthy market works, no? (Aside from the problematic data brokerage which is another issue)

And if they can’t survive that, then the business should probably not exist.

In that sense you could argue the market is “hurt” but I think consumers will benefit in the long run when competition can thrive, and monopolies do not exist.

Then the search company buy the ad service from the ad company, as all other search engines can then do as well. Isn’t that the point of breaking up a big company?

I’m a layman, but how is that harming the market?